| User | Post |
|
12:56 pm
September 18, 2009
|
saintstephen
| | | |
| Member | posts 520 |
|
|
Michael said:
Saintstephen:
The New Translations have begun for the Liturgy and most likely Latin will only be applied in those countries which speak Latin as a national or local language.
Like where? The Vatican?
In the Latin Rite, the liturgy is developed in Latin and then translated to the local languages. Currently a new English translation of the Roman Missal is being undertaken.
In Christ,
Michael
Michael, Hip, Hip Hooray! Finally you and I are on the same page even though we do not read at the same rate. I really get a kick about how we see the same words then read a different line. Hilarious! Almost like Laurel and Hardy.
|
|
|
12:58 pm
September 18, 2009
|
saintstephen
| | | |
| Member | posts 520 |
|
|
Michael said:
Saintstephen:
The New Translations have begun for the Liturgy and most likely Latin will only be applied in those countries which speak Latin as a national or local language.
Like where? The Vatican?
In the Latin Rite, the liturgy is developed in Latin and then translated to the local languages. Currently a new English translation of the Roman Missal is being undertaken.
In Christ,
Michael
Michael, Hip Hip Hooray, You and I are finally reading from the same page. I am amused that we see the same words yet write entirely different views. In Christ,
|
|
|
2:06 pm
September 18, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Post edited 7:26 pm – September 18, 2009 by Michael
[post removed because it duplicates that below]
|
 |
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
2:23 pm
September 18, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
[second try]
Saintstephen:
Since your citation above was truncated and unlinkable, I've reproduced it here. And, properly, it isn't a doctrine but, at best, a discipline since it can be changed. The title is clear that it is an "instruction."
You needn't take my word for it that the translation I provided is correct (see below) and that your understanding is mistaken. The letter from the Congragation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments can be found here addressing "the new English-language translation of significant parts of the Ordo Missae" of the Roman Missal. This is not a re-translation of the entire Order of the Mass based on ancient texts, as you seem to believe. It is a translation of the Latin text that Pope John Paul II revised in 2000.
Then you say:
The New Translations are more literal and so the new liturgical translation will become more like this in English: "Lord I am not worthy that you should enter my roof, but only say the word and my servant shall be healed".
Ummmm…no. I'm going with the US bishops and the dicastery cited above.
In case you are thinking that this is not going to be the final text, the USCCB has indicated that it will be the final but that, because some catechesis of the faithful will be required on the implemented changes, it will not take effect for a few years. Note on p. 40 the change in the tranlation is almost exactly that which I demonstrated in my prior post, not that which you provided.
Perhaps you should have read the article you reference more closely or perhaps the reporter simply erred. I'm not going to bother to read the article as the USCCB is the primary source for this type of information.
Again, I'm only addressing the Ligurgy, not the Bible. The Bible is always undergoing scrutiny to try to make the text more clear and accessible to the faithful. Whether it is the NAB (the text of the scriptures approved for the Ligurgy in English), the Jerusalem Bible, the Douay-Rhiems, or the Vulgate – all have received the necessary scrutiny to be acceptable for faithful Catholics to read and study.
If you want to discuss this more, let's get a new topic going.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
2:53 pm
September 18, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Saintstephen:
When I say
Like where? The Vatican?
it is intended to convey a certain disbelief of your understanding of how we receive the vernacular for the Liturgy, or what the official language of the Rite is. It's like you didn't even read the instruction you tried to link to on the previous page.
Latin is the official text regardless of the country. What Benedict did was to authorize the Missal of 1962 which has no vernacular. It is the Extraorindary Form of the Latin Mass. The ordinary form is what is being re-translated from the Latin Ordo Missae. Still, I'll bet you could find a Novus Ordo mass (Missal of Pope Paul VI) celebrated in Latin in your archdiocese if you made the effort, even during the pontificates of Paul VI or John Paul II.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
4:25 pm
September 18, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Noel:
There is a great article here (which I will not post)on Predestination. But here is a summary quote which I like.
He who would place the reason of predestination either in man alone or in God alone would inevitably be led into heretical conclusions about eternal election.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
6:44 am
September 19, 2009
|
saintstephen
| | | |
| Member | posts 520 |
|
|
Post edited 11:59 am – September 19, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 12:14 pm – September 19, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 12:25 pm – September 19, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 12:33 pm – September 19, 2009 by saintstephen
Like where? The Vatican?
Michael, Answer me this question: What is the Spiritual effect of saying something in Latin that was originally said in Hebrew [Aramaic], does it become more meaningful or Holy?
This is absurd to think that Latin is a more Holy language. It is simply used at the Vatican because Priests convene there from all over the world and so was chosen as the most common language to avoid thousands of translators.
English is rapidly becoming the world wide language in common so the text is being translated from Hebrew [Aramaic] to English for the sake of the common reader.
Even the Latin translated by St Jerome was deliberately translated to common Latin that is why they called it the Latin Vulgate. Vulgate translated means vulgar which at the time of Jerome meant the “language of the common people”.
There is no language spoke in the world even in the Vatican which makes the Words spoken by Christ more Holy or meaningful. The intention of the heart prompts the words spoken from the lips and as Christ already instructed us: “All manner of evil proceeds from the heart and out through the mouth”.
If you will spend a small amount of time perusing the Gospels you will read that it was known that the Apostles were immediately recognized as “having little education” yet the language that they spoke in Hebrew [Aramaic] astounding all including the most educated Pharisee, Sadducee and Scribes and the Roman elite.
What even astounded more is on Pentecost at the ourpouring to the Holy Spirit, “they spoke each according to the language of the hearer” which caused some to think the Apostles drunk and St. Peter said it is only mid morning, these men are not drunk. They translated the Holy Words of the Holy Spirit to each man according to their language.
Latin is not a particularly Holy Language in and of itself, it is merely the common language of the Vatican and it is what is said in Latin that can be considered Holy or not Holy by the Roman Curia or the College of Cardinals and the Pope.
Your premise is mistaken linguistically as the language used does not convey Holiness, rather it it the pure intention of the heart which is then spoken using translations that are in fact express Holy thoughts. It could be in Russian[for an example] and be more Holy in translation of Holy thought.
Further if you will spend a small amount of time perusing the Doctrine and the lives of the Saints and Doctors and the historical record of the early Church you will readily begin to see that the Bishops were installed according to their ability to speak a specific language.
Even today this method of selection of a Bishop applies most intrinsically, that is why Bishop Neinstadt is in Saint Paul, Minnesota and not the Archdiocesan Bishop somewhere in Nigeria or Ethiopia or Brazil as he is not fluent in the culture and the language of those countries, he speaks most fluently “common Minnesotan” and realizes also the culture of Minnesota even though he was born in Michigan then transferred here.
Language fluency and multiplicity of language efficiency plays a huge part in determination of installments to the Bishophoric all over the world including cultural mastery especially with “the intentions of the heart” of the constituents within each parish throughout all the Diocese.
If one only spoke and understand common Latin and no other language, the Bishop or Priest would be at a total loss for words in speaking the Holy Language of the Holy Spirit. He would have to use cue cards or sign language or expressive body language to get his message across to parishoners and in fact many Priests do resort to body language and cue cards and sign language even though they can speak English or Latin.
Pope Benedict XVI proved my assertion most effectively and recently when he cited the quotation of a 9th Century Irish theologian who, through meditation concluded that reading the Bible with a Holy and pure intention of heart will lead one only to contemplation of the Divine Mysteries which all in all are incomprehensible by mere man and so the effect of the Holy Spirit in grace is essential to comprehension. Further when one exhausts himself in contemplation of the Divine Mysteries the only proper response to the Bible narrative is Adoration of Christ, truly present in the Eucharist.
Pope Benedict had to resort to the use of a Celtic translation dictionary to "understand" this Holy thought written in Irish as the language used was not Latin nor translatable to Latin immediately and in fact was written and translated to English immediately, perhaps later will be translated to Latin for Vatican discussion by the Pope.
|
|
|
10:51 am
September 19, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Post edited 5:34 pm – September 19, 2009 by Michael
Post edited 5:51 pm – September 19, 2009 by Michael
[Edited to correct spelling and clarify a point]
Saintstephen:
Answer me this question: What is the Spiritual effect of saying something in Latin that was originally said in Hebrew [Aramaic], does it become more meaningful or Holy?
I think that the spiritual effect could be argued to be one of obedience, since, if you are of the Latin Rite, our Western Patriarch is the Pope. Other rites obey him as pope, but they have their own Patriarchs. So we (and I am presuming that you are of the Latin Rite) are subject to him not only as visible head of the Universal Church, but as our Patriarch of the Latin Patriarchate, too. However, that something may be said in the Latin language is inconsistent with its relative holiness. It is hard to imagine that the word feces is more holy because of the language than when my 2-year old says “poo.” But such was never my point, nor something that should have been inferred from my posts.
This is absurd to think that Latin is a more Holy language. It is simply used at the Vatican because Priests convene there from all over the world and so was chosen as the most common language to avoid thousands of translators.
So, to my point above, Latin is not a more holy language (and I never suggested that it was) than the Aramaic used by the Maronites, the Greek by the Byzantines, or the Syriac and Malayam languages of the Syro-Malabar Rite.
Latin is not a particularly Holy Language in and of itself, it is merely the common language of the Vatican and it is what is said in Latin that can be considered Holy or not Holy by the Roman Curia or the College of Cardinals and the Pope.
However, the language is much more than a common form of communication in Vatican City. It is part and parcel of the Latin Rite. It is the language that must be used for the mass if the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments does not give approval for the translation of the Ordo Missae into the local tongue for those of the Latin Rite.
Your premise is mistaken linguistically as the language used does not convey Holiness, rather it it the pure intention of the heart which is then spoken using translations that are in fact express Holy thoughts.
Since I never posited Latin as a language of intrinsic holiness, I don’t know how the above applies. What I have said is that our English translation of the mass is not taken directly from the ancient texts, but from the Latin (official) text of the mass. If and when the Church decides that it needs to change the text of the Latin Rite from ancient texts, that change will occur first only in Latin and from that alone to the other languages for which approval is given.
Whether a bishop can or should speak the local language or not a part of my point.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
1:31 pm
September 19, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Post edited 6:36 pm – September 19, 2009 by Michael
Post edited 6:48 pm – September 19, 2009 by Michael
I’ve created a new topic on Translating the Mass to delve into this further.
Let’s get back to Grace and Free Will. I think we were on Predestination for the Elect v. Damnation fo the Reprobate, right?
In Christ
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
1:36 pm
September 19, 2009
|
saintstephen
| | | |
| Member | posts 520 |
|
|
Post edited 6:38 pm – September 19, 2009 by saintstephen
Whether a bishop can or should speak the local language or not a part of my point.
Michael, Your writing style reminds me of a surgeon who is desperately trying to save the life of his national hero, Latino Hernandez.
The English Liturgy is in fact being rewritten as we speak under the supervision of the Prefect of the Doctrine. It is translating from Hebrew[Aramaic] to English and will not be stopping by Latin along the way.
As I discovered, your preoccupation with Latin is largely relished I presume from some cost you invested in learning it. The Vatican itself relinquished it’s foothold long ago in favor of communications done in various languages most commonly communicated in the Priesthood.
|
|
|
1:44 pm
September 19, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Saintstephen:
Please refer to my post of 18 Sept. at 2:23 pm. By following the hyperlinks, I believe that you will find you are mistaken regarding a re-translation of the Liturgy. Latin is the official text and approval was required for the English-language translation from Latin.
May I cross-post your comment into the new topic created for the subject or will you?
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
1:54 pm
September 19, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Saintstephen:
Also, if you do decide to cross-post, please feel free to cross-post my reply above in full, if you have a coment for it.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
10:11 pm
September 19, 2009
|
saintstephen
| | | |
| Member | posts 520 |
|
|
Michael said:
Saintstephen:
Also, if you do decide to cross-post, please feel free to cross-post my reply above in full, if you have a coment for it.
In Christ,
Michael
Michael, Here it is found: http://www.vatican.va/roman_cu…..am_en.html
Whenever the biblical or liturgical text preserves words taken from other ancient languages (as, for example, the words Alleluia and Amen, the Aramaic words contained in the New Testament, the Greek words drawn from the Trisagion which are recited in the Improperia of Good Friday, and the Kyrie eleison of the Order of Mass, as well as many proper names) consideration should be given to preserving the same words in the new vernacular translation, at least as one option among others. Indeed, a careful respect for the original text will sometimes require that this be done.
|
|
|
4:31 pm
September 20, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Saintstephen:
I'm going to copy this and reply in Translating the Mass
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
6:46 pm
September 21, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Noel:
I'm curious about how you reconcile a loving God with the dogma of Hell.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
1:22 pm
September 22, 2009
|
noelfitz
| | | |
| Member | posts 231 |
|
|
Michael said:
Noel:
I’m curious about how you reconcile a loving God with the dogma of Hell.
In Christ,
Michael
(I hope this turns out clear.)
I cannot. That is one of my problems. As I have said before God is God. He makes the rules. Life is tough.
|
Please consider posting to the Forum "Faith and Life" in the CE Roundtable
God bless,
NoelFitz.
In necessariis, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.
|
|
|
9:26 pm
September 22, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Noel:
What you demonstrate is a holy subsuming of your will and understanding to the teaching of the magisterium. Is it really a problem?
"Life is tough." Should we expect a better life than Jesus?
Have you had a chance to read the article on Predestination linked from the prior page?
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
3:00 pm
September 23, 2009
|
noelfitz
| | | |
| Member | posts 231 |
|
|
Michael,
I can never understand why God allowed His Son (Himself??) to suffer.
Adam and Eve ate the apple; to atone for this was it necessary for Jesus to be crucified. Of course not.
God is almighty. He wills everything that happens.
He, if he wanted to, could prevent any event.
The problems of grace and free will have been debated for hundreds of years by the best minds.
There are no simple answers.
One reads in Romans, chapter 9:
18 So then he has mercy on whomever he chooses, and he hardens the heart of whomever he chooses. 19 You will say to me then, “Why then does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who indeed are you, a human being, to argue with God? Will what is molded say to the one who molds it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the objects of wrath that are made for destruction; 23 and what if he has done so in order to make known the riches of his glory for the objects of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory—
The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989), Ro 9:18-23.
|
Please consider posting to the Forum "Faith and Life" in the CE Roundtable
God bless,
NoelFitz.
In necessariis, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.
|
|
|
5:46 pm
September 25, 2009
|
Michael
| | | |
| Member | posts 380 |
|
|
Noel:
Adam and Eve ate the apple; to atone for this was it necessary for Jesus to be crucified. Of course not.
I think that one could put forward the argument that Adam's sin (mankind's) was infinite in nature due to the infinite Love of God in creating us. That finite man could not atone for that. Only infinite man, found in the Incarnation, would be able to reconcile us with our True Love. Thus Christ, both God and man, had to take on himself the totality of all our sins, collectively and individually, and suffer in our place. Only He was able to suffer infinitely – and through His humanity, free us to be united with Him.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried."
"The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese."
– GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
4:42 am
September 26, 2009
|
noelfitz
| | | |
| Member | posts 231 |
|
|
Michael,
I am afraid I disagree with you.
God makes the rules. He can do whatever He likes.
When I sin the sin is against the infinite God, thus in medieval terms, the guilt is infinite and only God can forgive. This does not mean God has to kill His son for me to be forgiven (or allow His Son be be killed).
|
Please consider posting to the Forum "Faith and Life" in the CE Roundtable
God bless,
NoelFitz.
In necessariis, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.
|
|
Login 
Register 
Search 
CE Roundtable
Print this Post 
Topic RSS 
