Will the latest Catholic Mass translation get another overhaul?

More translation wars after CARA study?


(RNS) A new translation of the Mass has been used in the nation’s Catholic parishes for less than three years, but there are signs that the language — often criticized as stilted and awkward — could be in for another edit.

“We’ve tried it, we’ve lived with it, we think it needs correction,” Atlanta Archbishop Wilton Gregory told a conference on liturgical reform last month in one of the most public and high-level expressions of discontent with the missal, as the Mass text is called.

Gregory was seconded by Bishop Robert Lynch of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, in an echo of comments last year by Bishop Robert Brom, now retired as head of the San Diego diocese, who said “the new missal needs corrective surgery and this should take place without delay.”

And it seems English isn’t the only concern.

Critics of the new missal have also been buoyed by last year’s election of Pope Francis, who has shown himself to be far more relaxed about liturgical customs and a big change from Pope Benedict XVI, who was a stickler for old-fashioned rites and a chief proponent of the new English translations.

Moreover, bishops in other countries have in the past year taken advantage of the change of popes to call for a halt to implementing the new translations in their respective languages.

This article, and the study it is based on, are very misleading. The study only reflected a small percentage of parishes, and its responders were self-selected (ie. not random), so statistically its basically worthless.

The study was initiated by those who want to change the Mass language and it was designed to get the results it did, so they could then press for those changes.

Well, if they’re going to do anything, it should be a true vernacular. U.K. English is not like U.S. English and might be more high English, for example. But these studies might be all for naught if all the English-speaking bishops around the world have to decide on one and one only translation for all Anglophones. It shouldn’t take any studies to realize that.

I hope not. There has been enough damage done as far as I am concerned.

^^^This. For starters, how many Anglophones use words like “consubstantial” in their daily speech. For seconds, let’s get back to an accurate translation of "*et dimitte nobis **debita **nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus **debitoribus *nostris."

Who knows whether this article is true. I am really growing weary of the modern liturgy. I live close to many churches and reverent liturgies are so rare. I am growing convinced that our modern liturgy makes it so easy for it to be celebrated badly. I am seriously considering switching rites or attending an Anglican use permanently.

From the article, "75 percent of clergy and lay leaders say “some of the language of the new text is awkward and distracting.” I would include myself in that 75%.

Is there any sense that the Holy See is even thinking of changing it again. It’s a very laborous and expensive thing to do, is it not?

(Edit: Ok just finished the entire article. It’s so far down on the Holy Father’s list of priorities, Im not even sure why people thing this suggestion has any legs. :shrug: Fine, some dont like it. Got that. But that doesnt mean Rome is going to act on people’s personal preferences. Again, :shrug: )

This study has associations with some rather unsavory groups, like the Pray Tell blog.

Interestingly, when broken down for age of priests, 2/3 of younger priests polled like the new translation.

Anyway, I’m not sure why this all really matters. I mean, Pray Tell blog has really had it out for the new translation and they are just looking for anything they can find to badger on about it.

Definitely costly, just for the Vatican to maintain and oversee several hundred vernaculars.

(Edit: Ok just finished the entire article. It’s so far down on the Holy Father’s list of priorities, Im not even sure why people thing this suggestion has any legs. :shrug: Fine, some dont like it. Got that. But that doesnt mean Rome is going to act on people’s personal preferences. Again, :shrug: )

That may be but the bishops can be very influential when they want to be. Look at the German bishops in other things. And did you get that part where some bishops have conveniently tabled the translations which were required of them by BXVI? That’s bound to be found sooner or later.

These English translations I believe are affecting other religions. I think “and also with you” might still be used by the Anglicans and Lutherans, who may be having some influence too, for all we know.

Anglican use is 100% Catholic and more like the tridentine mass…i apologize for my previous post. If gets so discouraging sometimes that the sense that something extraordinarily Holy is happening at the altar is missing sometimes from our current liturgy

I believe that there are going to be a lot of changes in Catholicism over the next few decades due to an increase presence of the Holy Spirit, and that we are living in a rapidly changing world. I also think the Pope Francis will start some of these changes during his pontificate. I do not think it will be watered-down, but new revelations by which the Church can better help those grow in a deeper faith. Come, Holy Spirit!

LOVE! :heart:

There probably would be of no cost benefit in changing the Anglican Use or the EF (Tridentine Mass), which have pretty much their own prayers and are not so widespread. As I understand it, the Pope wants to keep costs down so I imagine he’ll leave a lot of this work to the bishops and the dioceses. I can’t picture the Vatican directing the correction of the English language any more.

I never know how to feel about this thought process. Isn’t the most important thing about the Mass is the fact that Jesus is really there? Consequently, while I can understand frustration with the current Mass form, it’s still infinitely better than the alternatives. If anything, we should make an effort to attend valid, licit masses that we don’t like. This way we can train ourselves to be attentive towards Jesus instead of externalities of the Mass.

An increased presence of the Holy Spirit?? How has He *not *always been with us in His totality for the past 2,000 years? The Church will always be the antidote to the world, NOT capitulating to it as many wish through change, but be the beacon on the hill which always leads the way to salvation whether the world agrees or not.

Why apologize for an unfortunate truth? Catholics are losing their faith and volumes have been written about the loss of the sense of the Sacred in liturgy although we need no books to discern what is before our very eyes. We see it; we live it and we experience it as man continually draws the focus back to man, not the Transcendent.

I wouldn’t mind if they changed the “Lord, I am not worthy that you should come under my roof…” People still really stumble on that response in my church. Otherwise, I think it’s just fine the way it is.


Yes, the Holy Spirit has always been with us since the time of Christ, but too often, His ‘voice’ is overshadowed by Satan. As Church members become even more spiritual, the Holy Spirit will become more evident. Sorry about my poor phrasing in my above post.

LOVE! :heart:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.