We were on the road last Sunday so I missed the first Sunday of Advent which was also the "premier" of the new Mass. Even when I'm reading the new words, my brain can't help but say the words I've said for so many years. I've made no secret of the fact that I do not agree with all the time and money that went into putting these changes into place nor do I care for the end result. If it made our Mass more inclusive or changed it to language that was more contemporary with an intention to make the Mass more accessible I'd be on board. Instead, it now incorporates words like "consubstantial" and, in my opinion, does the opposite of making our prayers and intentions more clearly understood.
As someone who desperately wants the church she grew up in to move forward, to become more inclusive, more welcoming to all people, this is discouraging. To move back to a translation that is more like the translation pre-Vatican II? It seems like such a big step backward. I love the Catholic traditions I've grown up with and want to be proud of my church and share that with my kids. I hate that there are parts I will leave out because it's not what I want to teach them. And I am not under the perception that you have to love every part of your chosen religion. I believe God wants us to question things and challenge our faith. But this change in translation feels, to me, like a way to further ensure that we won't publicly change in a way that the Pope doesn't support. You are free to disagree with me and I also know the translation change isn't a big issue to everyone. That's completely fine, but my kids will read this someday and I want them to know how I feel about it.
‘Tis the Season Saturday {10.03.26}
13 hours ago
1 comment:
For years and years, Rome has been trying to dismantle Vatican II. Here is yet another step. There was no intention to make it more accessible -- one of the biggest stated goals was to make it more "mysterious." Well, I guess you could say they succeeded, because they've come up with such awkward translations that a lot of the mass does not make any sense.
Dave made the point that it has long been recognized that the most beautiful and poetic English is the English that leans toward the Anglo-Saxon roots of the language. All of the screwy, awkward, direct translations in the new mass have chosen NOT to use the Anglo-Saxon words that mean the same thing. Thus, words such as "consubstantiation." (Did you see Stephen Colbert on this? Great line was, "And Consubstantiation is now ISTANBUL!" (Get it? The city of Istanbul used to be called Constantinople!).
Anyway, I said to Fr. Keith after last week's mass that I've studied a lot of languages, I've had to do a LOT of translations from those languages (including Latin) into English and one of the first rules of translation is that a direct translation is not always a good translation. Rome clearly chose to ignore that rule in this absurdity.
So I'm with you COMPLETELY. But you already knew that!
Post a Comment