AmericanPapist Comments
It's excellent to see liturgical reform moving forward and the traditions of the Church being gradually restored. Now, the consecration will be guaranteed to have to correct "pro multis" formula, and a verbal veil will be placed over the sacred mystery in order to emphasize its holiness.
This seems to be one way in which the Extraordinary Form is enriching the Ordinary.
Please God, let it be so. And the sooner the better.
not gonna happen
An action like this would be so divisive that I can't imagine our holy father permitting it, much less initiating it.
I like the idea of moving the Sign of Peace, I find it distracting where it is right now, but it is nice to greet one another surely a better place can be found.
How about a better translation of the Latin to English in the Creed and Glory Be?
We profess that Christ was CONCEIVED and made man, not BORN and made man (as least in Latin, French, Italian, and Spanish).
We also pray that God be gloried for ever and ever "for centuries upon centuries" and not "world without end" because we also believe very much that this world WILL END!
I've never understood how ANY translator got "world without end" from "Saecula saeculorum" and "conceptus" to mean "born". But then, I guess I never got an "advanced degree in theology" either ;-)
The Glory Be we can thank Henry VIIIth for. Prior to his break with the Pope, most English Catholics recited the common prayers in Latin. After the break with Rome, that wouldn't do, so he pushed for a unified translation. The phrase 'world without end' is an Elizabethan idiom, and made perfect sense at the time.
Saecula saeculorm is perhaps better rendered as 'ages upon ages' and not 'centuries'. The notion of a century is relatively recent and was certainly not the intention of the original 1st/2nd century author. I would also add that the phrase 'unto the ages of ages' is retained by many Eastern Catholics/Orthodox, so score a point for that rendering.
But if it is clarity that is desired, then, since 'saecula saeculorum' is itself idiomatic, 'forever and ever' would be my choice. (Thus the curious Elizabethan 'world without end' in this light is thus not as unreasonable as it may first seem.)
Me?, I just stick with the Latin! :-)
As to the Creed, I am puzzled over your translation. Which Creed, Nicene or Apostles'? Your English phrase does not match the Latin of either. Conceptus is in the Apostle's Creed, so I guess that is the one you mean. The phrase is "qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine", which is rendered reasonably literally as "conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary'. Perhaps I am missing something?
Valete et salvete, omnes.
Even regarding the Nicene Creed, John's general point that it's mistranslated is correct. At least in the translation used in North America, "Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine et homo factus est," is rendered simply "By the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary and became man." "Et incarnatus est" ("and he was made flesh"/"became flesh") is nowhere to be found. Arguably, the translators mean the addition of the single word "born" to cover it, but it's pretty inadequate, considering that these words were traditionally considered the high point of the Creed. It's hard not to wonder if the translators responsible for that were entirely on board about the doctrine of the Incarnation. So yes, a revision would certainly be nice!
If one is to criticize a translation, it is helpful to others to state which one.
That all aside, for the Nicene Creed, you have your wish. The Creed was revised in accordance with
Liturgiam authenticam. Though when we will ever see it, I would not want to predict.
Commenting by HaloScan
