|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
CHANGES IN THE ROMAN MISSAL, PART 8: Deepening the Liturgical Lexicon
[EDITOR’S NOTE: This column is part of an ongoing series written by Father Daniel Merz highlighting many of the historical and theological bases of the publication next year of a revised English translation of the Roman Missal. Father Merz is the chairman of the Liturgical Commission for the Diocese of Jefferson City, Mo. — BH]
There is a need to broaden and deepen the liturgical/theological lexicon that we can draw upon in the English language. This will enable the liturgical books to be more consistent and uniform not only in the prayers, but also for the rubrics. Bishop Arthur Serratelli of Paterson, N.J., chairman of the U.S. Bishops Committee for Divine Worship, has written that the proposed translations “are densely theological. They respect the rich vocabulary of the Roman Rite. They carefully avoid the overuse of certain phrases and words.” (from a column which appeared in the June 19, 2008, edition of The Beacon, Bishop Serratelli’s diocesan newspaper)
The style of the prayer texts will be more formal than what we currently hear. Another description for this is that the new translations use a “higher linguistic register.” The texts portray a more submissive stance of humanity in relation to the divine power. They stress God’s mercy and our unworthiness. This is not at all to say that they promote groveling, a grim countenance, or worthlessness. To the contrary! The great truth of our unworthiness, when combined with God’s mercy to us in Christ, creates not despondency but delight! There is joy in the fact that God “has looked with favor on my lowliness, and from now on, all people will call me blessed!” (from Mary’s declaration to Elizabeth in Lk 1:48).
The word order of the new translations consciously follows the word order of the Latin as much as possible. This hinders the flow of English style a bit, but it adds a theological nuance that is important:
“Latin orations, especially Post-Communions, tend to conclude strongly with a teleological or eschatological point. The new translations in English follow the sequence of these Latin prayers in order to end on a strong note . . . Why should we strip the English translation of the distinctive theological emphases of the Latin text? A slightly non-colloquial word order can lead the listener to a greater attention to the point of the prayer.” (from Bishop Serratelli’s diocesan column)
For the sake of clarity, “teleological” and “eschatological” both refer to the final goal of life, the end time or heaven. Many of the Latin prayers end in the key of heaven — which is where every good prayer should take us! A good illustration of how this desire for a strong ending can make the English less fluid, however, is found in the proposed new translation for the prayer after Communion for Wednesday of Holy Week. Bishop Galeone of St. Augustine, Fla., proposed an alternative translation which rendered the English more fluid, but sacrificed the eschatological ending (i.e. ending with a reference to the goal of heaven).
Proposed New Translation:
“Fill our minds, almighty God, with sure confidence that, through your Son’s Death in time, to which awesome mysteries bear witness, you have given us perpetual life.”
Bishop Galeone’s Suggested Revision:
“Almighty God, fill our minds with [the] sure confidence that you have given us perpetual life through your Son’s Death in time, to which [these] awesome mysteries bear witness.”
There is a definite advantage to ending the prayer with the reference to perpetual life, but to do so will require the priest-celebrant to proclaim the prayer with just the right cadence and inflection. It will require mindfulness on the part of the priest.
Lastly, there has been a growing desire in recent years for the Mass prayers to be sung. Good singing can add a note of both solemnity and joy to a celebration. In order to facilitate this, ICEL has tried to be mindful of the rhythm and singability of the texts. It has also created a special committee which is working to write chants for these new liturgical texts.
When the revised prayers finally arrive, there will be new words to hear, new syntaxes to comprehend and a new style to absorb. This will require some effort on the part of the priest who proclaims, as well as on the part of the assembly who hears. One of the recommendations that have been continually stressed by the U.S. bishops is the need for the prayers to be written in sense lines to facilitate their proper proclamation by the priest.
The new translations are a great improvement in many ways over the current translation. Hopefully, we can experience a certain excitement that we will soon be proclaiming and hearing not something that was created in the 1970s and early 1980s, but rather something that is much closer to what the church has prayed for centuries, and which Catholics are praying in other languages around the world!
[NEXT ISSUE: We continue comparisons with the new translation.]
(This article was reprinted with permission from The Catholic Missourian, the newspaper of the Diocese of Jefferson City, Mo.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|