Can anyone tell me if the Vatican has mandated revisions of missal translations for any other languages besides English? If so then when are the other translations expected to debute?
From what I’ve heard, the rest of the languages got translated correctly the first time, so there’s no need for a New Translation. The “New Translation” for english was just because it was “translated” horrendously the first time.
The revision only dealt with the English language. Now, the USCCB has been working on a Spanish-language translation for use in the US; however, this version is only meant for use in our country.
The English-language version of the Roman Missal was problematic from the get-go because dynamic equivalence was employed, rather than a more faithful means of translating the Latin original.
Not surprised here as the English translation needs recognitio per territory. Same thing I expect that the Canadian French possibly is different, or at least given recognitio separately from the French Missal in France or in other French speaking territories
Why would the USCCB need to retranslate the Spanish missal if it was already translated correctly in the first place? Sounds kind of strange to me. Why should Spanish speakers in the U.S. have to hear a different mass translation then those throughout the rest of the Spanish world?
This sounds like it could create a lot of confusion?
Also, was the French language Missal translated correctly in the first place too? How come they have so many traditionalist Catholics in France if their liturgy is already so traditional?
We are currently using the Roman Missal approved for use in Mexico. However, the Hspanic Catholic population is not exclusively Mexican-American, as there are Latinos from Central and South America, the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. Some of the patronal feasts that are celebrated in Mexico are not necessarily the same as the other areas. Thus, there has to be some sort of unity between the various Spanish translations. Just because something in Spanish, that does not necessarily make it a one-size fits all.
We must not forget that the English translation that is coming down the pipe is of the Third Edition. Its translation into other languages is not yet complete.
I discovered, when seeking out the French translation of the GIRM, that the French equivalent of ICEL is still working on the translation of the Roman Missal. I doubt, though, that it is proving as difficult a task as the translation to English was.
It must be remembered that Spanish is not spoken the same world-wide. I know that South America fought for years to not use Spain’s translation because of its formal language and different usage of certain words.
Like the French, Spain’s Spanish uses the second person plural to denote respect; I was surprised to learn that such is not the case in South American or Mexican Spanish.
As one priest put it, “Since we couldn’t get Rome to move, we published our own Missal and used it until Rome finally gave in.”
The French translation presented fewer problems because it was from one Romance language to another so it’s certainly closer to the Latin than the English ever was. Traditionalists didn’t want the vernacular, regardless of the quality of the translation, and they didn’t want a new Ordinary of the Mass, they wanted to retain the1962 Missal.
According to the report this week from the BCDW at the FDLC meeting, they are waiting for several translations from South American conferences to receive the recognitio before coming to any decisions about the Spanish translation for the US
From what I was told by our previous director of diocesan worship (who worked on the Spanish translation for the US), our version is about as ready as it can be. In fact, in 2004, the subcommittee on the Spanish translation met down here in Laredo to work on that and the Order for Quince Anos (the latter of which was recently promulgated). What I do not like is the removal of “vosotros” in favor of “ustedes”. Some parishes down here already using “ustedes” even though no recognitio exists yet for the change. The Mexican version of the Roman Missal (at least what is officially in use now), retains “ustedes”.
The French (Canada) missal uses the same translations as in France and all other francophone countries:
There is no new French translation of the missal in the works, as the original translation doesn’t have all the issues that the English one does.
I wonder why the Spanish, from the masses I’ve attended (pretty much all my life) it seems that the Spanish is pretty much a literal translation. Everything that I’ve noticed is done the way the new Enlgish translations is written, but in Spanish. Unless I missed something?
Did you mean to say the Mexican version retains “vosotros”?
There is a new French translation coming since there was a new Missal promulgated. How much change we’ll see, I don’t know, but L’Association épiscopale liturgique pour les pays francophones (AELF) was commissioned with the translation by the Commission Épiscopale Francophone pour les Traductions Liturgiques (CEFTL). It took them 6 years to do the GIRM and now they are working on the Missal itself. They expect it out in either 2011 or 2012.
They are simultaneously working on a Bible translation for liturgical use. I think the French Lectionary presently uses the Jerusalem Bible translation, doesn’t it?
We just don’t hear about the French translation much because the original translation didn’t have the problems that the English one did – although just googling the topic tonight I found that some people do have problems with parts of the French translation and find it lacking.
Last week, EWTN carried a Mass from St. Patrick’s Cathedral. In the Sanctus, "Deo Sabeoth was translated as “Dios de los ejercitos” (God of the armies) which (from my understanding) is the translation from Spainard Missal. The Mexican Missal (or at least the version that I have become accustomed to) has “Dios del universo” (God of the Universe).
Which version is the USCCB going to have? I see this as a no-win situation. They are going to annoy and confuse the half of the Spanish population whose translation they abandon.
Interesting. If you know, is that just in the Mexican Sanctus, or would that also be found in a Mexican Bible (or Mexican lectionary for Mass)? I’d never given it much thought at the Spanish Masses I’ve been to, but on thinking about it I’m reminded of the Deus exercituum (= Dios de los ejercitos) which appears throughout the Vulgate.
I know one of the reasons why there is a new English translation of the Mass is because the translation of the first edition of the ordinary form of the Roman Rite was ‘poor’ and the English translation of the second edition was not given recognitio. The new English translation is a translation of the third edition and follows the principles laid down in Liturgiam Authenticam. Won’t other languages need a translation of the third edition?
It uses the “Bible de la liturgie” Bible de la liturgie, which is much more “plain language” than the Jerusalem translation.
I wasn’t aware of a new French translation. The CCCB site’s French side only speaks of the English version.
The CCCB is not known for putting ‘upcoming’ things on their website. They wouldn’t even have mentioned the English Missal translation if the US hadn’t announced the implementation date for theirs, triggering a flurry of inquiries about ours. Then their response was that we’d have to wait. You’d think they could at least put up the Ordinary of the Mass which they say they already have.
According to the letter our pastor got from our bishop they are looking at implementing the GIRM in the spring (Easter, maybe?) and they are still aiming for Advent 2011 for the Missal. But they seem to enjoy the secrecy.