Our Missal is Hard on the Ear!

2 Responses

  1. Victor Victoria says:

    In this new era of dialogue and collegiality (the pontificate of Francis), I would hope that the English speaking bishops would be open to a review of their translation fiasco. At least the UK Bishops retained the Jerusalem Bible translation for the readings. Why the SACBC opted for the NRSV translations is beyond me! Who were they trying to please? Certainly not the People of God sitting in the pews on Sunday …

  2. Jonathan says:

    I think this article shares a very simplistic approach to this complex issue. Lets be honest, shall we? The old translation strays far from the original, especially in the orations. Try comparing collects sometime and see how they were massacred.

    The new translation is far better in preserving the original, but has the air of the synthetic due to the poor attempt of retaining the Latin style. I have heard it said that it sounds like the attempt of a beginner trying to do a translation of the Latin original – is this the bet the Latin Rite can do?

    We should look to the Anglicans (Anglican Ordinariate?) for good English translations (Coverdale psalms for example with a bit more LXX) or f we must keep it in the family, the unofficial translations of the Gregorian Missal, as it is obvious that we cannot get it right.

    There have been so many complaints, yet I have to hear of one person having the gumption to offer a better alternative. Let’s stop complaining and do something about it!