[quote="Kearney, post:5, topic:215361"]
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?
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.