October 23rd, 2012 - Lexi-721255 said:
This has been the worst year since I started going to church in 2004. I do not like the "roof" either, I cannot keep up with the Creed, the church -- con-substantial??? I can't even pronounce it! I still have to read from the book and I have no love for mass like I did before the changes. I never missed a Sunday however, this year I'm glad when I make it at least once a month
October 4th, 2012 - Betsy-904124 said:
Why is now "and with your spirit"? Why can't it stay "and also with you". I mean, why should the Lord be with only your spirit? Why can't He be with all of you?? It just seems to me that the church is becoming PC...if we must change, then change back to Latin.
October 1st, 2012 - Tim-388058 said:
I think the liturgy changes were stupid. They didn't change any of the meanings but they confuse older Catholics. And "under my roof"? Crazy! I know where the phrase originated and the story behind it, but this wording makes no sense at all. I wish they had left the liturgy alone.
March 4th, 2012 - Teresa-525463 said:
I trust that Rome had its reasons and I trust their updates. I only know the language of the Mass in Latin before Vatican II and the very modern English as it exists now. The Mass has been translated from the original language to languages all over the World. Last summer, I was in Easter Island out in the middle of the Pacific and attended Mass in Spanish and Rapi Nui. It really didn't matter what was said I know the format and believe in the Eucharist. It was there that I truly grasped the word universal=catholic. I don't think a few word changes here and there will alter what I believe and what the Catholic Church believes. It's way too legalistic for me!!
February 9th, 2012 - Rebecca-808272 said:
It's a very literal translation, which helps you get a different meaning out of it, but it's awkward sometimes. In the sung mass parts your'e fitting new words into old music. What happens when you go to a church that does not use the one you know? You can't participate in the Gloria or Holy, Holy or Memorial Acclamation or Great Amen. Unless you have the new music infront of you, which probably not many churches have yet.
January 22nd, 2012 - Dennis-593298 said:
Attendance fell dramatically all over the world when the New Mass was imposed 40 years ago. Having a new mass with a dumbed down structure and translation has been a tragic failure. And yes, Jesus almost certainly did speak Latin, as he spoke freely with Pilate, the Centurion, etc. He did not speak English (a language that didn't exist).
January 21st, 2012 - Mary-814080 said:
I have am having a few problems with the new missals. Did Jesus speak Latin for one? Why are we going to the literal version word for word? When did Jesus have a chalice, it was a cup and finally, it is my fault, my most grevious fault. I grew up with the Latin Mass, if the church didn't change how many of you would still be there? I would have probably left. I have an elderly father, who is now lost with the changes. Some are not noticeable but others are quite significant. I find I am reading the prayers now at Mass and nit liking some of the changes.
January 20th, 2012 - David-736772 said:
There are parts I either like or don't mind and there are part I don't like. The problems are mainly with the translation. While I do realize it is a more direct translation from the Latin Missal, parts of it do not reflect actual spoken English very well and obscure the meaning behind the words from the average churchgoer. The whole point of translating the Mass and Sacred Scripture into the vernacular languages was so that the average person could them without assistance.
January 16th, 2012 - Tom-14285 said:
Since the words we say at the Liturgy effect what we believe, I think the 'new' changes are very necessary. I am having difficulty getting used to it, but when I read the new translation, I find it very beautiful...and I wonder why it took so long to correct the mistranslations. Now to get ALL the bishops to promote the Traditional Latin Mass...then we will be on the complete road to restoring the liturgy. (I believe that in 100 or so years the 'new' Mass will disappear and this whole era will be considered a failed liturgical experiment.)
January 15th, 2012 - Carolyn-764114 said:
I am old enough to remember when the Mass was said in Latin only, all over the world. At that time I used a Missal that had Latin, and the English translation on the opposite side of the page. That happens to be the translation that we are now using at the present time. I don't understand why we used the wrong translation for so many years. Yes, I am
having difficulty with it now, because of the many years in between. When I read it before it went into effect, I joked and told people the "roof" is back. They didn't understand what I meant, but they do now.
January 11th, 2012 - David-635002 said:
I understand what and why they did what they did. I am not so sure it was really necessary though. Some of the new words that replace the existing ones because they have a truer meaning to the Latin counterpart are words like "consubstantial" and "Incarnate" are words that most people never heard of and have no clue of what those words actually mean, so really what have we gained except to cause more confusion.
January 3rd, 2012 - Bob-179105 said:
I am adjusting to this. We have a card in each pew, so we can follow the changes. Being a "cradle-Catholic," I had everything commited to rote-memory, so I need this card. However, I feel that we must evolve to better understand the needs of the people. We will all eventually adjust.
December 27th, 2011 - Andre-713286 said:
Curiously the change happened only on the US Missal, other countries are not changing at this point.
There's nothing wrong with change itself, but clearly, very clearly, the Mass is more Latin than never. While it can add to the Roman roots and traditions (and a lot of people will cherrish learning about it) I wonder if it doesn't create a new BARRIER to people coming in. Singing and praying Mass suddenly has a new level of friction and CERTAINLY does not get closer to colloquial, everyday English; it seems to be a step to distance Catholics from the remainder Apostolic traditions (Protestant, Orthodox, etc) who are either using eastern languages and traditions (as opposed to Latin and Roman) or pioneered the usage of local language (one claimed reason for their departure, BTW).
In times of Social Media (here we are in the middle of an exchange!) I wonder if this helps us proclaim the Gospel from the rooftops or if we are digging the basement claiming that it is prettier than never.
That's to test the common sentiment: how does it feel when you are faced with something purposefully unusual but deeply rooted in the traditions?
You stop. You wonder. You MIGHT feel puzzled, confused, attracted or curious. But you DEFINITELY stop when you saw it. No motion.
Is it what we want?
"Lift up your hearts" is the translation and my message to the forum. Thanks a bunch!
December 21st, 2011 - Denise-803319 said:
I like the "new" "old" translations. The church never should have changed. We have the oldest religion second to Judiaism and their services don't change for the times. Nor does the Orthodox such as the Serbians or Russians. We went more Protestant with Vatican II. I had a priest who refused to change until about 1968 so I remember a lot of these "new" words from when I was making my first communion. Except for consubstantial, I do like the conversion back to the older way. I would love to see the latin mass come back, especially for special occasions such as the Midnight Mass at Christmas.
December 19th, 2011 - Jorge-443462 said:
THE ROMAN missal new translation is amazing its like in spanish but in english closer to the latin, its time to change the translation it was through and review a project of the Holy Spirit and Juan Pablo II ITS a great work and helps closer to eh scriptures to pray the actual words.
December 15th, 2011 - Frank-800329 said:
Remember when there y Interestingwas Latin Mass and the priestfaced the alter and you saw his Back! I think that our change is just somewhat difficult at this stage. If you attend mass daily or more regularly it be ones easier to master!I had to chuckle on all the comments about the word" consubstantial"( one in being)for those who might want to look it up. Ver
December 11th, 2011 - Tara-703107 said:
I LOVE the new version. As a former protestant, and also Latin mass goer, it incorporates so many traditions, and sacred scripture, that in a way it's very ecumenical. I find it very comforting, to incorporate some of the phrases from my childhood services (I was Lutheran). I used to go to Latin mass, but it's not available where I live now. I think it's a way to draw people together--give it time!
December 10th, 2011 - Chris-658557 said:
I have very mixed feelings about the new Roman Missal. Whilst it is good to get back to the Latin meaning, there has been a total lack of preparation for the effect these changes have had on the musical settings for the Mass. The result is that, in my Diocese, all parishes have been instructed to use a plainchant setting that adds nothing to the Mass and there is a total lack of alternative suitable material. This is causing much frustration and many parishoners are turned off the new wording as it has destroyed a Mass which was enhanced by the music. It is a pity that the same amount of effort has not been put into the musical provision as has been given to producing the new translation.
December 9th, 2011 - Pauline-621008 said:
December 9,2011 -Pauline-621008
I love the new Roman Missal. It takes me back to the days of the Latin Mass. If you remember any of that you'll realize that the congregation's responses are mostly the English translation of the Latin responses. For example: With your spirit--Et cum spiritu tuo. The priest's part may have changed more than the parishioners' but if you follow especially the Eucharistic prayers we are more involved in the celebration than before. I was very impressed at the first "new Mass" on November 27 and told my pastor.
December 7th, 2011 - Ryan-78912 said:
Thank God for the changes. As I review what has been posted below, I have to make some comments. First of all, the changes are in English not Latin. I am sure everyone here is educated enough to learn a few new words. Second, the texts are ancient. They should never have been translated into such sloppy, easy english where all the meanings were lost. 90% of the Mass is written in a very biblical language which you could never make the connection to the verses of the bible as it was translated for the past 40 years. The new texts should make you feel like the liturgy is majestic and beautiful. If you do not like the translation of the Mass, then you don't like the Mass, because this is simply a literal translation of the approved texts in Latin, as we have them from the fathers of the church for the past 20 centuries. So before the critics here get all huffy about it, maybe it is time to re-examine your understanding of the doctrines contained in the Mass.
December 6th, 2011 - Stephen-704916 said:
I suppose in time that new music will fit the words. Nevertheless, using words like consubstantial and incarnate will not bring the mass closer to the people. Using language that the common man doesn't understand will only serve to place back in the time when the mass was in Latin and only a few understood what was being said. While most of the translations are reasonable I believe someone in the Vatican had too much time on their hands if they thought using words that are probably used only among theologians would be helpful for the laity.
December 5th, 2011 - William-792747 said:
It always made sense to have a missal. We grew up using a missal which had Latin on the left page and English on the right. It was simple znd guided the laity in participating in prayer with the priest. While Vatican II brought the vernacular
participation, there were many more pews filled. Does this tell us anything?
December 2nd, 2011 - Cyndi-72431 said:
I think the new translation has been an amazing opportunity for the faithful to grow more in love with Christ and His Church. It's a blessing to be able to connect with the Mass that has been Traditioned down through the centuries. My students say that they find that they are paying closer attention to the words of the Mass and finding a deeper meaning as they prepare for their final Sacrament of Initiation.
November 28th, 2011 - Barbara-584798 said:
My parish team introduced us to the changes over the past few months; in particular to the changes in th sacred songs/psalms by using them at Mass and thru a parish "concert" recently. The full changes of course began Nov27 and thru the use of printed pew cards to aide us I believe the active participation by those at the Mass I attended was increased greatly. I was particularily impressed by my pastor during the consecration. I had known the priest's changes were the greatest and I could tell he was deliberatly reading all parts with careful enunciation more to help us to better "hear" the changes and hence listen more effectively. I think these new translations will help all to deepen our understanding if only because we need to read our responses for awhile. Hopefully, this will also increase the active participation of more people throughout the Mass instead of remaining passive throughout the communal responses,prayers, and sacred songs.
November 25th, 2011 - Anthony-664095 said:
I've understood the mass to be, most importantly, the partaking of the body and blood of Christ, and secondly, probably the highest form of prayer, although a communal supplication, there is. What matters is not necessarily the words, but what each one of us brings, on a deeper spiritual level, to every one of those words, actions, thoughts, and prayers. The Church can change the words or procedures of mass, but they can not change the fact that mass is OUR time, communal and personal, with the Lord. On some levels, it is the closest we'll ever be to the Lord while living.
November 22nd, 2011 - Jonathan-612626 said:
ElIzabeth, what is the point of doing all that if the truth and doctrine and faith and morals aren't there. No one can be saved without the Catholic Faith. Many (US) priests aren't giving it or appear to be muted or drowned out by the crazies and craziness of the average Parish. The novus ordo ethos blocks the Catholic faith from getting to souls though not absolutely. Your statement is proof of this. The Church is not here for the community but for God to serve and adore Him. The Church is a community but we ought to be self-giving not self-center that is not man-center but God-center. We can only do this by knowing the truth.
November 17th, 2011 - Jonathan-612626 said:
Tammie, haven't you ever heard of our Lod's parable of the Pharisee and the Publican? The Publican is said to "beat" his breast in asking God mercy for his sins. No, there is no love without sacrifice, and no forgiveness without PENANCE.
Kayla, there's virtually no difference in the "Domine, non sum dignus" The more faith translation is: "Lord, I am not worthy that shouldst enter under my roof but only say the word and my soul save be healed". It is almost what exactly the Roman centurian said to our Lord but instead of soul he said slave/servant.
November 17th, 2011 - Jonathan-612626 said:
Why isn't there the option: "Only the Tridentine Missal is the Roman Missal."
And, Shellie, there are "Low" or Missa Cantata (Sung) Masses without incense used even on Sundays if you search for them. Also please check "xylitol" for your son's asthma.
November 12th, 2011 - Shellie-789322 said:
I love the Mass just as it has been. My son has asthma and so we have to avoid the Latin Mass. The only thing I would like to see is the candles again and closed areas for confession. I enjoy saying Lord I am not worthy along with my brothers and sisters, none of us are worthy to receive Christ and need to ask to be cleansed. Taking more drastic actions seems odd to me.
October 31st, 2011 - George-166509 said:
I'm so happy about it I am just beside myself! And it's going to be implemented on my birthday, Nov. 27. Thank you, God! What do you know, a correctly translated liturgy! Maybe soon the guitars, banjos, and electric drums will be gone. And maybe after that, the Communion Rail back!
October 25th, 2011 - Sylvia-775951 said:
Understandably, Most People Don't Like Change ... But, Change is a Real Part of Everyday Life ... As an iPhone user, we have Updates quite often and for the Most Part They Are for the Best. ... As Committed Practicing Catholics, Our Obedience is to the Church, WE Don't Decide Who or What We Will Obey or Disobey. I would Encourage Everyone to Attend the FREE Roman Missal Workshop Offered by your Diocese before jumping to Conclusions :-)
October 25th, 2011 - Sylvia-775951 said:
I think the Revisions are so Minute yet Much Closer in Context with the Original Latin ... I attended the New Roman Missal Workshop Offered to Our Parish at Our Lady Grace in Highland, IN and They were Great! ... I don't understand What the Big Deal Is? ...
October 22nd, 2011 - Nigel-84606 said:
@Harry-242615 - I would disagree, I think they're underestimating the intelligence of the people in the pews. We've been fed a lot of "feel good" mush from the pulpit, and while the "revisioning of the revision" is a step in the right direction, as long as the same mush is being preached from the pulpit, the people wouldn't know any different.
However, with the changes will come questions, and with those questions, I'm hoping there'd be more definitive answers coming from the clergy. Is it enough? I'd say it's a step in the right direction.
October 22nd, 2011 - Harry-242614 said:
From what I've seen, it's nearly the same as the first translation to English back in the '60s.
Sadly for most of us, it will no longer be "dumbed down". I'm pretty well convinced that the Church overestimates both the intelligence and the educational achievements of the folks in the pews.
October 21st, 2011 - Joan-684265 said:
I loved studying the Latin language when I was young. ((And I had a remarkable teacher, Sister Mary Baptist.)) Some of the translations which we have used at Mass in recent years really bother me. In spite of not being "correct" I have in recent years said the REAL translation in spite of the fact that I "sounded" out-of-step. But I was theologically correct. Hooray for the improvements that take us back to more accurate translations. Joan in Houston//Friday night
October 6th, 2011 - Jim-284023 said:
If the church wanted to get the ultimate translation then they should have went back to the Aramaic, after all that is what was being spoken the time of Jesus. Maybe in another 30-40 years the church will use Aramaic for the next Roman Missal. Lastly, in my opinion their are more important changes that church could have made.
October 3rd, 2011 - Adolph-446505 said:
I love the Church and being that this is only the third time in our Church history that a new Roman Missal is being issued, it tells me that we are truly blessed with the treasure of always growing in the Faith and the Holy Spirit is guiding us to deeper and deeper for Christ and his Church.
October 2nd, 2011 - Linda-363797 said:
It is not my understanding to change hymns etc. It is to better translate the Roman Missal from Latin to English, as I understand from EWTN documentary to explain that when the Mass was changed from all Latin to English the translation was made rather simplistic to make it easier to do and then actually lost some of the beauty of the words. I hope all your parishes give some sessions as our parish is going to give in the next week or so.
September 26th, 2011 - Julia-170924 said:
Missal is good, what I miss is all the CATHOLIC hymns we sang in grammar school. Other denominations did not start singing our beautiful Gregorian chants, why did we pick up their songs. Sometimes it just sounds like we are being entertained by a singer at MASS.