Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That said, many of the changes restored long-standard English translations of things that the prior “Sacramentary” obviously mistranslated.

Examples are “Et cum spiritu tuo” never meant “and also with you.” It always meant “and with your spirit,” and Latin/English Missals before the Council all translated it that way.

If these were "obviously" mistranslated (and I agree, based on my high school Latin), why wait so many years to fix it? That's what I don't get.

The Church moves slowly, and tries to coordinate liturgy on a worldwide level to maintain the universality that is the hallmark of the Catholic (universal) Church. Much easier before 1962 when dealing with only one liturgical language. That said, it is sad that the faithful were deprived for decades of an accurate liturgical translation.

or more likely pope john paul was trying to leave a legacy and that he did.

Pope Saint John Paul II was going on six years dead by the time the revised Missal took effect. The finer points of liturgical translation in one of the plethora of vernacular languages the Church uses was hardly a focus of his Pontificate. The Catechism and Revised Code of Canon Law, among other things, were far more important.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still hate how we used to say, “and also with you.” And now have to say, “and with your spirit.”

We should have been saying “and with your spirit” all along. That’s what “Et cum spiritu tuo” means.

I think the meaning is still the same. You=your spirit. What is really the difference?

The “sense” may be similar, but the literal rendering of the words from the original Latin to English is not. That is the crux of the matter: “sense” translation versus “literal” translation.

The fact is that the now-superseded “sense” language in English did not track with liturgical translations in other languages. In French, for example, “Et cum spiritu tuo” was translated as “Et avec votre esprit.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That said, many of the changes restored long-standard English translations of things that the prior “Sacramentary” obviously mistranslated.

Examples are “Et cum spiritu tuo” never meant “and also with you.” It always meant “and with your spirit,” and Latin/English Missals before the Council all translated it that way.

If these were "obviously" mistranslated (and I agree, based on my high school Latin), why wait so many years to fix it? That's what I don't get.

The Church moves slowly, and tries to coordinate liturgy on a worldwide level to maintain the universality that is the hallmark of the Catholic (universal) Church. Much easier before 1962 when dealing with only one liturgical language. That said, it is sad that the faithful were deprived for decades of an accurate liturgical translation.

or more likely pope john paul was trying to leave a legacy and that he did.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That said, many of the changes restored long-standard English translations of things that the prior “Sacramentary” obviously mistranslated.

Examples are “Et cum spiritu tuo” never meant “and also with you.” It always meant “and with your spirit,” and Latin/English Missals before the Council all translated it that way.

If these were "obviously" mistranslated (and I agree, based on my high school Latin), why wait so many years to fix it? That's what I don't get.

The Church moves slowly, and tries to coordinate liturgy on a worldwide level to maintain the universality that is the hallmark of the Catholic (universal) Church. Much easier before 1962 when dealing with only one liturgical language. That said, it is sad that the faithful were deprived for decades of an accurate liturgical translation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still hate how we used to say, “and also with you.” And now have to say, “and with your spirit.”

We should have been saying “and with your spirit” all along. That’s what “Et cum spiritu tuo” means.

I think the meaning is still the same. You=your spirit. What is really the difference?

Anonymous wrote:
That said, many of the changes restored long-standard English translations of things that the prior “Sacramentary” obviously mistranslated.

Examples are “Et cum spiritu tuo” never meant “and also with you.” It always meant “and with your spirit,” and Latin/English Missals before the Council all translated it that way.

If these were "obviously" mistranslated (and I agree, based on my high school Latin), why wait so many years to fix it? That's what I don't get.

I go Episcopalian now and they still pretty much say it the way I grew up. When I want to be extra precise, I just do the Latin.

Like our political climate, Christian churches are pulling away from the center. I’m going with the Christian left, which just seems more Christ-like to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still hate how we used to say, “and also with you.” And now have to say, “and with your spirit.”

We should have been saying “and with your spirit” all along. That’s what “Et cum spiritu tuo” means.

I do not care. I like, “and also with you.” And will say it forever.

you sound more like a traditionalist than a Roman Catholic. There have been many changes in the church over the years. When the Church says do something, a Good Catholic does it.

Not exactly. The Church is wrong about abortion and female ordination. Pro-life is anti-woman as is Complementarianism. Good Catholics wouldn't hate women because that's prejudice and prejudice is not Christian.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the raising hands during the our father. Isn't that just for the priest to do?

I hate that too and my kids stare at me like raise your hands and I’m like no thanks.

The “orans” posture during the Our Father is, as you observed, for the priest alone. The aping thereof by the laity, along with other arm-waving, seems to have infected the Church via the “charismatic movement,” aka “Catholic Pentecostalism.”

Chiming in on the raised hands during the Our Father. Hate it! We're not effing Evangelicals. Thankfully, at the parish where I currently attend mass, not many people do it. FWIW Many people feel very strongly against the raised hands during the Our Father.

Also, since Covid, not so much shaking hands during the Peace by With You section. More peace signs, waving, and nodding to acknowledge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still hate how we used to say, “and also with you.” And now have to say, “and with your spirit.”

We should have been saying “and with your spirit” all along. That’s what “Et cum spiritu tuo” means.

I do not care. I like, “and also with you.” And will say it forever.

you sound more like a traditionalist than a Roman Catholic. There have been many changes in the church over the years. When the Church says do something, a Good Catholic does it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still hate how we used to say, “and also with you.” And now have to say, “and with your spirit.”

We should have been saying “and with your spirit” all along. That’s what “Et cum spiritu tuo” means.

I do not care. I like, “and also with you.” And will say it forever.

Well, I just say “Et cum spiritu tuo.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still hate how we used to say, “and also with you.” And now have to say, “and with your spirit.”

We should have been saying “and with your spirit” all along. That’s what “Et cum spiritu tuo” means.

I do not care. I like, “and also with you.” And will say it forever.

Anonymous wrote:Pope Benedict thought it was a return to a more literal translation. I miss the old way too, but oh well…

The entire point is that it was not “the old way,” but rather a novelty that flew in the face of longstanding translation practices that significantly predated the Second Vatican Council.

Pope Benedict thought it was a return to a more literal translation. I miss the old way too, but oh well…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know what you are talking about, but I can't say I understand the reason. We've gone from "Holy Ghost" to "Holy Spirit". They've rewritten the Apostles Creed - "consubstantial" with the Father. When I was a kid, we never said "consubstantial".

I think I used to say "of one with the father". Does that sound familiar?

"one in being with the Father, through him all things were made" as I recall

Episcopal church still says it that way.

The normative/authoritative and universal text in the Episcopal church is not in Latin, hence no translation issues. Being a self-governing body by definition separate from the Roman Church they are free to do as they like, but their choices are irrelevant to Catholic tradition.

"the Roman Church" spoken like a true Episcopalian.