There is some real concern that someone at the Vatican has tinkered with the English translation submitted by the English speaking bishops who approved it in 2008. The 2010 tinkering was not approved by them, but by someone else. It is not an improvement evidently. You can read about this possible debacle from three sources. The first source, the blog PrayTell has been the only blog until yesterday, when Fr. Z chimed in, to actually bring this to the blogging world. PrayTell is slanted as are all blogs, except mine, but has done somewhat of a good job with this. So as is my policy, and in a fair and balanced way, I bring you three articles on this, from PrayTell the first to tell the blogosphere, the NCR, fishwrap, but with good articles at times and then from "What Does the Prayer Really Say" by Fr. Z, who sent my rats in the rectory nightmare worldwide!
A POST FROM PRAYTELL ON THE DEBACLE
A POST FROM THE NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER ON THE DEBACLE
A POST FROM "WHAT DOES THE PRAYER REALLY SAY" ON THE DEBACLE
If this debacle in translation comes about, maybe like Fr. Z writes, the only solution will be to use the Latin and get missal companies to do an accurate translation of the Latin for in pew following! If you look at the pre-Vatican II St. Joseph Sunday Missal for the Tridentine Mass, their English translation of that Latin Mass is superb. I guess they didn't have a committee doing the translation. You know what they say, God must have used a committee to create the Giraffe! The same thing has happened with this English translation! Tower of Babel all over again!
7 comments:
"For God so loved the world that he did not send a committtee...."
Fr. McDonald: I guess they didn't have a committee doing the translation.
I have a fairly large collection of pre-1962 Latin-English hand missals. So far as I can see, the excellent English translation in each is due to a single author, or perhaps a pair of closely associated co-authors.
A committee job inevitably involves comprises in quality. The worst possibility is subsequent action by a consultative body (e.g., a faculty senate or bishops conference) voting on frequently half-baked amendments from the floor. Then think of the mind-boggling possibility of a dozen or so bishops conferences all sticking their dirty fingers into the pie.
It's virtually a miracle that the final 2008 product of this impossible process was apparently excellent. This result being contrary to nature, somebody evidently decided it could not be allowed to stand unsullied.
Yet another reason to prefer the EF. It seems that the widespread chaos in the world's institutions continues to wreak havoc in the Church.
The "Just Use Latin" position of Father Z seems the most likely, and best, result if the translation has been further altered. The issue seems to be a simple one: are there any Clergy who are good writers of English and competent in Latin. I would expect so, but my idea of good writing has a 17th century feel to it.
Is there a desire to make the text 'more accessible'? If so, that would be a mistake similar to the clown vestments in some of the photos you have posted.
rcg
My Dear rcg, I must confess that I was struck by a profound sense of agreement with your statement that ones sense of "good writing" is more in line with the mores of the 17th century. Alas most of what passes for language today can be lifted whole text from Catcher in the Rye.
It would produce tears of joy if the English translation implementation became a debacle which could only be set aright by the use of more Latin.
Henry: "I have a fairly large collection of pre-1962 Latin-English hand missals. So far as I can see, the excellent English translation in each is due to a single author, or perhaps a pair of closely associated co-authors."
I agree with this. I don't understand why it takes a committee to make this happen. Just look at the Latin-English booklets we have at St. Joseph for the Tridentine Mass! Excellent translation right there... why not just use that?
The people in charge of these things have so little faith in the intelligence of the laity - they feel everything must be dumbed down and simplified.
Not only can the laity not be trusted to understand the general action of the Mass when it is in Latin, but the laity cannot even be trusted to understand our own language when it isn't of the type that we hear everyday!
Based on this reasoning, schools should stop teaching Shakespeare until a committee gets together to revise his text using the colloquial speak of our current day.
Give me a break and give me the Mass in Latin. PLEASE!
For God so loved the world that he did not send a committee
good site is very site
Post a Comment