"It's hard to suggest that 'and also with you' represents a pernicious effort to deny the existence of spirit when 'spirit' isn't in the original at all." OK, but "In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy You" is surely misleading, no? But it is the same Greek word ("pneuma"). Yes, the Greek implies "spirit," "breath," and "wind." So we recognize that when Jesus "breathes" on the Apostles, he literally fills them with Holy Spirit. Ditto when the Creator "breathes" on the slime to create man (Gen. 2:7). It is not just niceness in language, it's the essence of the thing that the term we use should imply the sense of "eternal livingness" which constitutes the very reality of the human spirit. This simply cannot be conveyed by "also with you." My own opinion is that changing "Holy Spirit" to "you" was a needless compromise with the common materialism of the 60s. It will be a great victory for the Faith embodied in the Creed when the liturgical elements are restored, since we do believe as we pray.
Illustrating perfectly why I dropped out of these debates. If you can't read the original languages themselves, you're perpetually at the mercy of what people tell you.
But just for the record, I'm not aware of anyone praying in the name of the Holy You anywhere. Nor do I think "and with your spirit" will convey anything about the Holy Spirit. Most people I'm sure will understand it as a blessing: the Lord be with your soul. Is that a truer blessing than the Lord be with you?
Mind, I'm not advocating anything, as my whole premise is that this is a matter above my pay grade. I'm simply saying the way I think the average pew-sitter will understand what's being said.
Commenting by HaloScan
