Let’s focus in on “since without you mortal frailty can do nothing.” Just what the heck does that mean? Wouldn’t it be better to pray, “since without you, frail human beings can do nothing”? Or, and how about making it postive: “since with You mortal frailty can do something.”
It seems to me, that “without You, mortal frailty does do something and it isn’t good!” We sin without God!
As I chanted this at both Masses, I stumbled because I thought I was saying something that wasn’t written and at the second Mass I was so flummoxed that I skipped the line after it, only to have to go back and chant it right.
UGH!
Am I making much to do about nothing, like without You mortal frailty can do nothing?????????
42 comments:
Could be re-written to give it a better flow in English, yes. When chanting, a slight pause between "...and, since without you (pause) mortal frailty can do nothing..."
Or, just chant the Latin. It’s easier and more accurate.
And very few understand it... That's the ticket! And, yes, understanding matters. We haven't lived in a world where the educated clergy were the primary beneficiaries of the meaning communicated in the words of the mass for 200 or so years now.
It used to be "since without Thy help, mortal man can do no good" but the NAB is squeamish over using "man" as a collective. Perhaps they could follow popular culture and use "guys" instead.
As a lay person in the pews who has a deep respect for the Traditions of the Church, I find the current English translation very “clunky” in places. It was admirable to have a more faithful English translation of the Latin. But this translation is not the best. There is no elegance, no flow, at times it’s completely unintelligible to an ordinary Catholic. I don’t understand. Look at the English in the Divine Worship Missl that the Ordinariate uses. It’s not only elegant but understandable. I say let the people that translated that missal rework our Missal. But the real problem with the Missal of Paul VI isn’t a translation it’s primarily the fault of priests not celebrating the Mass as prescribed in that Missal. I’m so tired of sloppy Masses and priests going out of their way to be casual. Example. During the Introductory Rite there is a perfectly suitable greeting prescribed,but then priests go off on a tangent saying good morning, glad you are here, don’t worry I know the game is on today, this won’t take long….etc. Priests….STOP THIS NONSENSE. As a Catholic I have a right to have the Mass and sacraments celebrated with some dignity AND as prescribed in the Missal. All these priests always going on about the necessity of following Vatican II, well the current Missal is the product of Vatican II and you, Fathers, have no authority whatsoever to add, remove or change anything in the Liturgy. It doesn’t belong to you. Be faithful to Vatican II, actually read the Council documents, and implement them. Stop the nonsense and conduct yourselves like Catholic priests. We the laity don’t need a buddy, we need faithful priests.
Including you, All Highest K. That is why we have Missals with a vernacular translation opposite the Latin Text just like librettos at Operas! Again, you are ignoring the mandate of Vatican II that Latin in the Mass is to be preserved and Gregorian Chant has pride of place!
“Mortal frailty can do no good” is confusing as it personifies “frailty “ which isn’t a person but an affliction. Your translation makes sense!. I guess to make it inclusive it could be “since without Thy help, mortal humans can do no good.”
I vaguely remember learning, at one point, that the new English translation is heavily literal because the English is used for some vernacular translations that are even more difficult to render from the Latin (e.g., some Asian/Oceanic languages).
To your other point, I attended Mass at a different parish yesterday. The “presider,” (yes, that’s how he was described) apparently has a compulsive tic for changing the words of the missal to make them more “meanningful.” I could probably count on one hand the orations, greetings, etc. that weren’t modified in some pathetic way, outside of the Canon. And thats to say nothing of the man’s pathetic stand-up showmanship sprinkled throughout the Mass—you know, to keep us engaged and participating.
Nick
And now that the people can understand 100% of the words, only 20% believe in the Real Presence.
Father Anthony,
Touche!
Anthony - Underlying your comment is the claim that, back in the good 'ol days, everyone believed everything exactly as it was taught. When the mass was in the old form, there was universally perfect, or near-perfect, faith.
If that was the case, how did so many of those who went to mass in the old form participate in the evils of slavery, persecution of the Jews, the oppression of anyone who was not royal, noble, or aristocratic, etc.
Maybe 99.9% did believe in the Real Presence. So how did that belief translate into love for others?
How very condescending of you Fr K.
Thanks to the magic of the Latin/English missal I have normally read and briefly considered all of the propers for the days Mass before the Mass begins. I dare say this lends to greater “actual participation “ than just hearing them cold in the vernacular.
Btw the Mass all in Latin was able to subdue continents and convert pagan peoples for centuries. The NO Mass in the vernacular, so far not so good. 😊
Where is your proof that they did not believe? All the literature from the period indicates that they did. Were they perfect? No. No age was perfect, or will be perfect, and it is dishonest to hold them to that standard. That age also produced numberless saints and institutions that cared for the poor. You are just grasping at straws deny the reality of the great loss of faith that followed the reforms.
Don't confuse K with facts, not fair!
When this happens in Italy, we have a serious problem. Italy needs to be re-Catholicized:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2026/06/fssp-pilgrimage-in-italy-denied.html#more
Anthony - Where is the proof that they DID believe? Were there polls taken at the church doors at the Trier Cathedral, established in the 4th century or at the San Miguel Chapel in Santa Fe in 1620 or at the Etchmiadzin Cathedral, Armenia, established in the late 400's? I didn't think so. But everyone is SOOOO sure that their belief was rock solid.
You made the claim that Latin (et la) in the mass makes people better Christians. Where's the proof - and claims that "Everything Was Better In The Olden Days" isn't proof.
One example would be the Protestant reformation.
Agree. The pacing and timing of a phrase will make it much easier to understand correctly. "What's that up in the road a head?"
Agree, but it should then be part of the homily to explain it and why it is written that way.
Yes, but this poses a false dilemma, just state "...without Thy help a mere mortal can do no good...". It's like the news that turns everyone into plurals rather than risk someone being offended by a gendered pronoun.
Yes! That is why we must return to Latin at every chance. The pastor has the opportunity to explain the meaning and there are various translations in all languages that would elegantly help the homilist.
Timothy - You appear to have missed one small fact. The world has changed greatly since armies arrived in many parts of the "pagan" world that you say were converted and subdued by the Latin mass.
Reading along in your magic missal isn't what the council meant by full, conscious, and active participation. That participation, by the way, is not limited to what goes on within the walls of the church building. If one is fully participating, the words of the Sacred Scriptures should find a home and stir the listener to action after the celebrant says, "Go in peace, glorifying the Lord by your life." One is consciously participating if one sees and hears the actions and words of the priest at the altar and recognizes in them the actions of the Lord and of the whole Church at worship. One is actively participating when one is singing the responses and hymns, the Gloria and the Lamb of God, not sitting idly by while a choir sings a lovely mass composed by a great composer.
Condesceding? Nah. Just being real
There were clearer distinctions between Catholics and Protestants. Those who did not believe left and became Protestants. Stop denying history.
Perhaps not proof but evidence: higher rate of Mass attendance, higher rate of belief in the Real Presence, higher rate of vocations, higher rate of confessions among those who attend the old Mass today. But this does not match your agenda so you will ignore it.
And where is the proof that the reformed Mass produces better Christians that justifies the suppression of the old Mass?
Following the Latin in the Missal was exactly what the Council meant. I remind you that the Council called for the retention of Latin in the Mass. I celebrate the old Mass in Latin in a church packed with young families. They are fully, consciously, and actively participating in the liturgy. You need to get over your prejudicial views of those who go to the old Mass, either before or after the Council.
Ah yes Fr K, the myth of modern man. The fact is that the nature of man has not changed nor have his spiritual needs. I do appreciate the technological advances that have been made but my struggle between vice and virtue is no different than if I had lived 1000 years ago.
As for actual participation in the Mass, I rather enjoy lending my voice such as it is and when it is called for in the Kyrie, Gloria, Creed etc. I would like to raise a couple of points though.
First, interior participation or prayer is greater than exterior. Speaking or singing words without interior engagement is meaningless babble. This is why I try to review the readings and prayers before the Mass even if it is a Mass in English. Similarly, no one should “sit idly by while the Choir sings”. We should be praying interiorly in agreement with what the choir is singing.
Secondly, the primary purpose of the Mass is to offer fitting worship and sacrifice to Almighty God, not to stir up our emotions to go out and do good deeds.
First comes a proper fear and love of God, then from this flows love of neighbor and all kinds of good works. If good works do not originate in love of God then they are worthless.
Fr K, I pray that you will learn the TLM and pray it for a year or two. I think that then you might understand what all the fuss is about.
Timothy - Ah, the myth that what worked 1000 years ago in communicating the truths of the Faith will, necessarily, work today.
Interior and Exterior participation are equal. You, yourself, present that reality when you say, "Speaking or singing words without interior engagement is meaningless babble." I am reminded of the words of King Claudius in Act 3, Scene 3, of "Hamlet": "My words fly up, my thoughts remain below; Words without thoughts never to heaven go." Words and thoughts are part of the unchanging nature of humans.
The mass has two primary purposes - worship of God and the communication of the saving Mysteries to the people of God. If that communication does not, "...stir up our emotions to go out and do good deeds..." then the dismissal, "Go in peace, glorifying the Lord by your life" is meaningless.
Timothy, I am not going to learn the TLM for the reasons I have stated here many times. When "the fuss" is over language and the orientation of the priest celebrating mass, then the emphasis needs redirection.
Then why do you fuss over the orientation of the priest and insist on Mass versus Populum? And why do you fuss over Latin when there are many people who, following Vatican II, find benefit in it and can adequately follow the prayers in translation?
Father Anthony,
You're talking to a stone wall.
Here is an example of the hypocrisy and cluelessness of modern prelates, a la Archbishop of Detroit.
"From a priest…
I’m sure that you have seen this already, but the archbishop of Detroit was recently at the opening of a mosque in Dearborn, MI.
“There is no place where I feel more respect, fraternity, and kindness,” [inside a mosque] Archbishop Weisenburger said at the mosque’s opening ceremony on June 12, according to The Arab American News. “From the moment I entered this beautiful site, I felt a profound divine presence.”
What are the names of the parishes where he snuffed out the people who want to attend the TLM?"
I would immediately stop sending money!
Timothy - I don't fuss about the orientation of the priest. I celebrate versus populum as have most priests - the great majority of priests - for the last 50+ years. No fuss indeed.
Along comes Fr. Traddie who fusses about facing God, about one style of mass being "traditional" while other styles are not, about one form of celebrating being a fuller representation of the "apostolic faith" than another, about patens, female altar servers, communion on the hand, etc.
Only when THAT fuss arises do I share my thoughts.
Right, you don't fuss as long as everyone does it just as you want it done. If you really did not think that these things were important you would not care what others did nor would you stop them from doing it in your parish.
Anthony - I don't fuss about language, liturgical orientation, etc., until someone comes along and says "Your way is not traditional." It is traditional. I don't fuss until someone comes along and says the way he celebrates mass is one that fully expressed the Apostolic faith, and the way I celebrate does not. I don't fuss until someone comes along and says that the Concilium doesn't matter, disregarding the fact that its work was 100% approved by the Holy Father. It does matter and the approval matters.
That's what I fuss about.
So you don't fuss unless someone disagrees with you. Got it! And would you be OK with a priest under you who would say, "Father, I respect and accept both forms of the Mass but just prefer to say in the historical manner as provided by the new Missal duly approved by the popes"? If is approval that matters, why do you not accept that the popes, even in the new Mass, have approved Latin, ad orientem, etc., etc., etc.?
Anthony - I don't fuss until someone presents as true that which is false.
I've told you at least twice why I would not allow an associate to offer mass as you think is right and proper. I'm not going to repeat myself.
Right, you do not accept the Novus Ordo as approved by the popes. I get that. Then do not lecture others if they were not to accept it. As for the rest, do not treat what is only your private opinion as if it were the gospel truth. Much of what we disagree with is a question of judgement, not truth.
Father Anthony,
As a late priest friend of mine, who was a peritus at the Council, liked to say:
"there is no one more illiberal, as a liberal" K proves his point.
Happy Father's Day!
As a seminary teacher who was a peritus at the Council said often, "Don't pay attention to TJM." Msgr. Satterfield was very wise, even presciently do...
Anthoy - You claims about the style of mass you celebrate are false.
Disagreeing with you does not make them false. We hold different judgments about them. You need to distinguish between your private opinion and objective truth. But what is clearly false is that, despite your calls that everyone should accept the new Mass and the manner in which it is celebrated because they have been approved by the popes, you yourself do not accept the new Mass as it has been approved by the popes.You thus have no basis to call out others who do not accept the new Mass.
K's feeble attempt at humor is sad. He is also dead wrong in his statement about "Anthoy!" I guess he was typing that during cocktail hour!
Hang it up, K. You obviously don't have the Editio Typica of the Novus Ordo Missae, probably because you wouldn't understand the Latin texts nor the rubrics which prescribe ad orientem celebration.
Anthony - I judge your judgement to be false. Otherwise, I might jump on your bandwagon and enjoy the ride.
You need to understand that the Church's judgment regarding the Mass of Paul VII is what matters, not yours.
Really? Please specify what I have said that is false.
Father Anthony,
Another "riddle" K can't solve:
So, if the alleged problem that TC was meant to solve was that TLMers were behaving like a parallel group not integrated into the life of the Church, how does kicking them out of the parish that they help support and segregating them into the parish gym…
Post a Comment