What If We Just Said Wait?
The case for a grassroots review of the new Roman Missal
 SIGN YOUR NAME  |  SEE THE SIGNATURES  |  READ COMMENTS 

We are sorry we are not able to post all of the comments we receive.  The following selections are representative of many thousands more.

UPDATED  November 6, 2011

Already priest are doing thing in liturgy that are very spiritual to the priest, but they just leave me sitting in the pew dry. The thing the priest are doing remind me of the days when the priest had his back to me during the Liturgy. I sat in my world and the priest was in his world. I missed the beauty and wonder of the Consecration. Now I understand we are going to Sacred Language. The King James version of the Bible is in a sacred language and it is beautiful. It is also not in written in a way that I hear God talking to me. Please hold off changes that bring us back to a time where we had two spiritualities happening at the same time. The priest and the people. Don't let us separate again. Help us to be more family with our common language.
Charles Meyn | Lay Minister | Covington | United States
 
This translation is clunky, clerical, and academic. As one of my English teachers always said, why choose UTILIZE when better choice is the simple USE. The consubstantial God... oh, for the tedium of the classroom. And why the imagery of the chalice in the venerable hands? As for being with your spirit, we are both body and spirit, and so, I am also with you in both your forms. As for coming under my roof, well, I simply don't invited people to my architecturally simple Cape Code house, but I do welcome people to my home. My biggest gripe is the abandonment of the word WE in the Creed. There is something so powerful in a community of people declaring what they believe. Protestants enjoy their language of personal Lord and Savior; let's keep our community prayer for the community. And honestly, I believe Jesus died for everyone, not just some. Let's be big, welcoming, inclusive and always striving to do better. The committee that did this work needs to continue striving! Bridget Ryan Minneapolis, MN
Bridget Ryan | Lay Minister | St. Paul-Minneapolis | USA
 
I do not see any reason for the changes being implemented. The new words make me feel less a part of the liturgy. I am old enough to remember the liturgy BEFORE Vatican II, and i welcomed the changes to the liturgy at that time that made it easier to understand. Why are we taking a step back? Do not think that you can mandate this change, and have passive compliance.
Lauren Mittermann | Lay Person | Green Bay | United States
 
I am a convert to Catholicism of 20 years standing. Reared in a negative, judgmental Evangelical environment, I was drawn back to faith after many years by what I experienced as the welcoming, nurturing nature of the Catholic Church, the feeling that in Catholic churches, I was truly in the presence of God. Now I find myself very unhappy and feeling very unwelcome by this batch of wordy, pompous and utterly unnecessary changes that are being shoved down peoples' throats. I recognize the Church's authority, but I will not be bullied by anyone.
Anonymous | Lay Person | New York | USA
 
I have been in an actual Mass in which these changes have been implemented. To me, they seem to be change just for the sake of change. For example, "seen and unseen" changed to "visible and invisible." What's the point? They mean the same thing. Also, why the change from "We" in prayers said by the group to "I." Isn't the Catholic faith about community? If so, this is a huge contradiction. I have done research as to why these changes are being implemented and I have found no real reason, only a sales pitch to try to convince me...I am not convinced. I agree wholeheartedly with the core beliefs of the Catholic faith, but this is yet another change by man and not by God.
Amanda Wilson | Lay Person | Peoria | USA
 
I am very angry. I am starting an "ADD YOUR TWO CENTS" campaign at my church. Add two pennies to your weekly donation in the basket, to let the pastor know that you are opposed to the changes in the Creed, Gloria, etc. I am printing up business cards that say "ADD YOUR TWO CENTS" To the Basket. I am hot gluing two pennies to the front. On the back it says KEEP THE TRADITIONAL MASS.. GLORIA... CREED. Add your two cents to the basket weekly if you agree.
Thomas Holmes | Lay Person | Boston | USA
 
Whoever wrote this translation, what on earth were they thinking!?!?!?! Nobody who speaks English talks like this. With all the major problems the Church has to deal with, why would you spend time on this? They are going to drive away even more people than they already have........
Charles Ehring | Lay Person | Philadelphia | USA
 
Eucharist is about celebrating the merciful presence of Christ among us. It is not dependent upon words, gestures, and rules. I am disturbed at how the revisions move us further away from this splendid reality.
Maryann Lucy | Religious | Brownsville, Texas | United States
 
this translation sees to be a Parthian shot by those who hated saying the mass in English. it will reduce participation and attendance.
mark fitzgerald | Lay Person | peoria | usa
 
As so many liturgists have said, the issue of the New Roman Missal is about much more than translation. It is about the curia's failure to trust the combined wisdom of English speaking bishops and priests, not to mention the laity. If you silence the contribution of any part of the church, you silence The Spirit.
Jeanne Zylstra | Lay Minister | St. Petersburg, Florida | USA
 
It is extremely sad to see the changes of Vatican II slowly and systematically being sidetracked, undermined, reversed. The particularly irritating thing about the new missal is the banality of much of its English. Having taught graduate courses in medieval Latin for many years, I found the directive of a Latinate -style translation to be senseless. How many of us remember how difficult it was to read the old Latin-style Douay Rheims translation? And how eye opening it was to read the English of the Jerusalem bible, among other fine modern translations, or the splendid King James translation? A literal translation of a French sentence about my name and age would read: "I call myself Bill and I have 69 years." This would merit a professor's directive to re-do the translation into idiomatic English -- which is something that the (mis)translators of the soon to be released missal should be required to do.
Dr. William Coleman | Lay Person | Brooklyn | USA
 
I do not object to the idea of changing the Roman Missal, or other elements of the mass. Discomfort always surrounds change. But this 'revised translation' is nothing more than a kow-tow to those who would just as soon do away with the legacy of Vatican II. The return of the beating of the breast and 'mea maxima culpa' is a travesty, and is contrary to the life-affirming mission of the Church. Yes, there is a place for humility and acknowledgment of fault. But when too great an emphasis is placed on our sinful nature, it diminishes the wonder of God's highest creation - the one made in His own image. The message is not that we are unworthy, but that because of the grace of God and his death on the cross and resurrection, we ARE. To proclaim otherwise is an insult to him who made us. Because I do not believe these words, I will not say the new Penitential Rite. I will not beat my breast. And I dare anyone to tell me I must.
Jack McGuire | Lay Person | Archdiocese of New Orleans | United States
 
I wonder how long we have before the window opened by Pope John XXIII will be closed completely. I am struggling to breathe in this suffocating environment. In the midst of today's enormous scandals and diminishing congregations, our Church has focused on forcing its faithful followers to accept a foolish return to a stilted translation of the Latin Mass. The Scribes and Pharisees are alive and well.
Louise Z. Buckley | Lay Person | New Orleans | U.S.A.
 
I am concerned about these changes. The phrasing is often quite awkward. As a religious educator for 20 years, I am very concerned that will make participation and understanding for all, especially children, difficult. Let's take our time.
Diane Doucette-Cooney | Lay Person | military archdiocese USCG Kodiak, AK | United States of America
 
I COME BELATEDLY TO THIS "FIGHT." BEING A DAILY COMMUNICANT WHO DOES NOT "DRINK THE KOOL-AIDE," I AM APPALED AT THE REALITY OF HAVING TO FACE ONE MORE OBSTACLE TO LIVING A MEANINGFUL FAITH-LIFE.
DANIEL W O'BRIEN | Lay Person | CHICAGO | USA
 
My family's feeling, a family with young 'children, is the changes come at a confusing time for them as their faith is developing as soldiers of God. We question the value or benefit these changes bring to our parish and the church as a whole, especially so soon after the recent debacle of how the harassment charges were handled. Now is not the time to introduce confusion to young, new or long-standing parishioners, potentially driving their interests in developing stronger faith in other directions, when all that is being done is a substitution of words and not the development of stronger love for God.
Ray Patterson | Lay Person | St. Patrick | usa
 
Having just attended a preparation session for the new liturgy, I see the proposed changes to the Mass as ranging from ridiculously trivial to disastrously counterproductive and regressive. I am appalled that the Church has allocated time, talent and resources to this project when there are so many other urgent issues before it including the decline in the number of religious vocations, the decline in attendance at Mass and, of course, the ongoing scandals of sexual misconduct which are sorely testing the faith of Catholics. The new liturgy subjects two of the most ridiculed Catholic beliefs, the Trinity and the Virgin Birth, to new, opaque language: "consubstantial" and "incarnate" respectively, in place of the clearer "one in being" and "born." Why? To what productive end? In another section, "brothers and sisters" has reverted to the less inclusive "brethren." That was offensive to women in the much earlier Mass; it is no less offensive now. Exclusivity, or rather exclusion, rises again in the Eucharistic Prayer: " . . . which will be poured out for you and FOR MANY for the forgiveness of sins" instead of "for all,." Why not just say, "for you." and leave it at that? It seems that the misguided committee that came up with the new liturgy ignored the basic tenets of communication: 1. "KISS" (Keep It Simple, Stupid) 2. Never use a multisyllabic word when a simpler one will suffice. 3. If it's not broken, don't fix it!
Anonymous | Lay Person | Atlanta Archdiocese | USA
 
I am used to change in my life, personal and working life. I am not against change. I am against the procedure used to introduce the final text and the purpose, when there is so much more we should be focusing on as a church, and as individuals in that church.
Peter Farrell | Lay Person | Plymouth | England
 
The new translation is a great step backward. Translating literally from one language to another (particularly from a dead language) never produces a satisfactory result; it can only be stilted and a bit obscure.
Richard Kirby | Lay Person | Westminster | United Kingdom
 
The new translation is cumbersome and removed from the language which ordinary people speak and understand. It is authoritarian and out of tune with where people are at the beginning of the twenty-first century. People will 'vote with their feet'.
Wendy Smith | Lay Person | Westminster | UK
 
These unpleasant and unwieldy translations remove much of the simple beauty of the previous texts. They present particular difficulties for those of us who compose new music for the liturgy. The Gloria is proving especially intransigent, due to it's clumsiness in terms of scan, rhyme and number of lines per verse. Such a retrograde step in the Church needs to be resisted with all our might. It's OUR church, after all. The Bishops should only offer guidance and example, they ought not to be dictatorial.
Louise Chrispin | Lay Person | Westminster | uk
 
I am deeply disheartened to see the church going backwards. On Sunday I felt as if I'd gone back to my childhood in the fifties, and the feeling of shame and guilt that was ingrained in us then. I just don't feel I can go back to church again. Where is the message of Jesus's compassion and love in this liturgy? It's all about keeping people down. And the bit about 'entering under my roof' is just ridiculous. Who says that in normal language? Thank you for this because there is nowhere else my voice can be heard.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Rochdale | UK
 
The translations are stilted and contain grammatical errors. A translation should convey to the reader, listener the original meaning in contemporary language. The new translation seems based on ideology.
Jeffrey Smith | Lay Person | Portsmouth | UK
 
I was horrified to discover this year that the mass was going to be changed, and even more horrified after hearing it said today. After Vatican II mass was supposed to be in the vernacular in order that everyone could understand it.. I could not understand all of what was said today. You cannot translate directly from Latin to modern English without changing some things. The Latin mass had been around for centuries, it was not in line with modern English. I am a young person and I dislike the fact that the church is shutting us out. I am constantly frustrated by the fact that the church is ignoring it's future. It is perfectly okay to revise the missal in order to move forward, this is a move back.
Maria White | Lay Person | Brentwood | United Kingdom
 
The lack of engagement with the laity on this issue is typical of the Vatican's abuse of its authority. This year I took the scary step of voting with my feet - I can no longer be a part of this male dominated, authoritarian church and have started attending our local Methodist church - a breath of fresh air and so liberating. I miss the members of my old congregation a lot but have been warmly welcomed at the Methodists.
Margaret Magenis-White | Lay Minister | Brentwood | UK
 
This is going to seriously deter folks from participating in the Mass. It is pure foolishness and again, we, the laity feel powerless.
Meg Rogrs | Lay Minister | Providence | United States
 
A dynamic translation communicates the meaning of a text into the target language...in this case English A translation based on syntax, punctuation..... does NOT. This will not encourage people who are beginning to feel alienated from the Church to keep trying because the emphasis on God's love and Jesus's humanity is lost. Furthermore, the Vatican has forgotten that WE are the Church when it decided to trash the translation that had been approved by the Bishops - solely to appoint a new group to translate. This seems to be an attempt to exert sole authority by the Pope.
Dr. S.F. Shields | Lay Person | Metuchen | USA
 
I am a technical writer by trade. My job is to make complicated ideas understandable to people who don't have a technical background through the use of simple language. I am appalled by the new translations that the Church has mandated. For the most part, the concepts that are present in the various prayers have not changed at all, but the new language is torturous and obscures the meaning of the prayers. English is not Latin. No language is translated literally when trying to express concepts in another language. I am reading a translation of Beowulf that in no way attempts to be a literal translation...if it did, it would be very difficult to understand. Our prayers should be said in a language that is easy to understand, particularly if you are trying to reach out to people who are not well educated. I don't go to Mass to hear poetry. In fact, I dislike poetry because the meaning of the poetry is often obscured by the abstract representation of concepts that the poet uses. I want to hear God's Word in plain language that I can understand and apply to my daily life. In addition, I am a member of the music ministry, and the new wording is extremely difficult to put to music. I have been a devout Catholic my entire life. My children have attended Catholic school through the University level. I have been an active volunteer, including a music minister and lector, throughout my entire life. But if the Church insists on making these absurd wording changes, I intend to find another Christian denomination in which to participate, because the Church hierarchy apparently cares nothing for the opinions or feelings of its members.
Mary Ann Pike | Lay Minister | Pittsburgh | USA
 
While the first translation definitely needed improvement, I don't think backwards is the way to go. The new/old translation is clumsy in the extreme and over-wordy. And it most certainly isn't accessible: who says 'consubstantial' or 'ineffable' in daily conversation? The Latin Mass has its own beauty, but an archaic translation is not what we need, and it certainly won't bring the young back to the Church.
Carolyn White | Lay Person | Sydney | Australia
 
It continues to baffle me that we continue to put a wedge between our young folks and our mother church. This is not right and worshiping our lord should not be dictated by language but by spirit!
Kathy sullivan | Lay Person | Rockville center | Suffolk
 
I will continue, in protest, to use the present language of the mass. I already change the sexist and exclusive words to more acceptable words anyway. Does the Vatican remember a concept called "reception", I wonder? And I wonder what would happen if every Catholic knew and understood this concept....I suspect that the implementation of this missal would fall flat on its face, and quietly go away.....
Katherine Cameron | Lay Person | Regina | Canada
 
While these changes may have good intentions, I think they will have the unintended result of discouraging some churchgoers from attending mass. Additionally, these changes seem to suggest that our prayers must be presented in some formal, official way in order to be heard by God, while most of our meaningful conversations with God occur with unplanned casualness.
Roger Strong | Lay Person | Rochester | United States
 
Fortunately my Parish - an English-speaking one amidst French in the Swiss Romand - has not yet introduced the new missal. I have looked at the text and I find it totally alienating, as a woman and as a modern person. Our Geneva Parish at the John XXII Centre is amazingly international, with English-speakers from the Philippines, Congo, Liberia, Nigeria, Kenya, United States, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, India, South Africa.... but we can all come together in the Holy Spirit with these familiar English words that speak to all of us from all our cultures. It feels like home for us even though we are mostly far away form our origins. Please do not destroy this blessing.
Mary Picard | Lay Person | Lausanne | Switzerland
 
I experienced one of the new translations at Mass several weeks ago. It was shocking to hear "precious chalice" instead of "cup," literally an interruption in my prayerful attention. We use precious chalices at the altar, certainly, but Jesus didn't have one.
Cathleen Gould | Lay Person | Boston | USA
 
I feel better knowing there are so many concerned
Anonymous | Religious | Darwin | Australia
 
As a new Catholic and parishioner of St. James Cathedral here in Seattle, I share the concerns about the new missal. I would favor a reassessment with a more considered introduction of any changes. I feel that the risks of alienation and confusion are high and that the potential for creating distance between people and their faith is great.
James Kyle Bryan | Lay Person | Seattle | USA
 
Change is always hard, especially for an institution that has been around as long as the Catholic Church. And we DO need change, but FORWARD, not BACKWARD! This recent conservative movement within our Church is only going to divide us further, and send more youth running to our Protestant neighbors. Too many rules forced upon the people with a pseudo-intellectual, "for your own good" attitude (like the Pharisees) is NOT what Jesus intended for His Church!
Kathleen Magruder | Lay Person | Orlando, FL | USA
 
We should not change or take steps backwards. I remember when the Vatican II Council was held and what a wonderful time to be a Catholic. I like the old saying, "If it is not broke, don't fix it!"
Sheila A. O'Neill | Lay Person | Seattle | USA
 
I just finished my first year of teaching religious education to first graders. It was very difficult to teach them responses to the Mass - especially to those who didn't go on a weekly basis. Words like "consubstantial" are intimidating, to say the least. This new format seems so cold and formal. These changes are what pushes people out of the Church. We should be working to KEEP the faithful, not show them the door.
Loretta Sehlmeyer | Lay Person | Rockville Centre | USA
 
For many Catholics, the liturgy is the first exposure to the teachings of Catholicism, and as such carries immense spiritual power. I knew the words before I knew what they meant, and they are tied up intimately with my experience in the Church, carrying the comfort of tradition and evoking the mystery and glory of God. The Church is more than its words, but the change would bring a deep sense of loss for those of us who grew up loving the familiar words of Mass. As a Latin student, I also take issue with the arguments of the Roman missive's supporters. Latin and English are profoundly different languages, and literal translation frequently loses the power of the original. Figurative translation is a far more effective, sophisticated approach to interlingual study; replacing the current figurative translation with something more literal would likely take away from the power of the liturgy, rather than adding to it. And while its supporters claim that the new liturgy will be more poetic than the familiar, many of the changes make the mistake of favoring "big words" when technical language is rarely more powerful than the plain words of everyday speech, as my English teachers remind me frequently. Maybe it's the power of familiarity, but "one in being with the Father" is for me a far more powerful phrase than "consubstantial with the Father."
Megan Thompson | Lay Person | Seattle | United States
 
It seems our beloved Church should be focusing on bigger issues than revamping the mass.
Connie Voigt | Lay Minister | Seattle | USA
 
Why is it necessary to change the text of prayers that people have finally accepted after so many year to wording that will come across as obtuse, distant and even in places disparaging? Many lay ministers experience difficulties with the vocabulary and cadence of the liturgy today; the new formulation will be impossible for these speakers to announce and a disaster for the congregation at large. Perhaps this is just a first step on the road back to Latin Mass for all.
Bernie J Pistillo | Lay Person | New York | USA
 
Haven't we had enough of closed door politics, secrecy and scandal? Must we now endure another elitist, power-grabbing attempt to keep the praying faithful "at bay?" Where is the Jesus of the gospels who moved among the people and prayed with them?
Elizabeth Roberts | Lay Minister | Rockville Centre | USA
 
The new translation, upon my initial review, seems to me to make the words of the mass more remote at a time when the mission of the church should be changing to one of greater inclusion. I strongly object to the addition of the 'mea culpa' which seems to me to seek to shame churchgoers. Alienation and condemnation are already too much a part of many people's conception of the Catholic Church and this new missal will only reinforce those ideas among lapsed Catholics and non-Catholics alike. Shouldn't the Vatican be less concerned with adding some 'ands' to the Nicene Creed and more focused on caring for their flock?
Anonymous | Lay Person | Providence | United States of America
 
I cannot accept in this day and age that we should have a new translation imposed on us without discussion or consultation or at least a pilot in one area. The language is out of date in many respects and too Latinate with too many sub-clauses. We don't speak like that to one another, so why should we speak like that to God? Yet another deterrent to young people - when will the church hierarchy see the light on these matters? Why override the International Commission on English in the Liturgy - they have worked for years to get the language right.
Margaret Martin | Lay Person | East Anglia | UK
 
The new text is a disgrace to our English language and distorts our sense of community at prayer..
Anonymous | Religious | Brooklyn | USA
 
The prayer of the liturgy is something that stirs my deepest thoughts and emotions. The current translation may not be perfect, but it is at least close, and more importantly, it is something I can echo in my heart and devote my entire being to, without the distraction of having to wonder what was just said or what it means.
Joel McAllister | Lay Person | Seattle/St. James | USA
 
As a 23-year-old recent college grad, I have only experienced post-Vatican II Catholicism. I cherish my time at Mass every week, in no small part because I find the messages delivered easy to relate to and understand. These changes concern me -- I value the consistency of the Catholic rituals I have come to know and love. I support the leadership of my Church, and I trust in them to follow the Lord's instructions. Perhaps I am naive, but so long as we are gathered to worship the Lord, what does it matter what words we use to do it?
Meg Martinez | Lay Person | New York City | USA
 
Making the Mass more spiritual is a wonderful idea; cloaking it in obscure & archaic language is not
Kevin J Clark | Lay Person | Portland, Maine | USA
 
I am a Ph.D. student in medieval art history who has devoted my life to studying lay books of hours and pilgrimage in the Late Middle Ages. Every day in my research, I read Latin prayers that were popular for medieval laity. So, I understand and even appreciate that the Church wishes to bring the Mass language closer to the original Mass language. But for those Catholic faithful who do not read or understand Latin, or who did not receive the education to readily recognize what words like "consubstantiate" mean, this will be a disservice. I realize the Church wishes to elevate the solemnity of Mass. However, aside from the notion that "you can't teach an old dog new tricks," this move will only alienate more of the Faithful in an age when so many Catholics are already rapidly leaving the Church. Please keep the Church moving forward, rather than pushing backward.
Megan Campbell | Lay Person | Atlanta | United States
 
We don't need in the 21st Century a Latinized English liturgy. We should use the English of Cardinal Henry Newman, Graham Green, Gilbert Keith Chesterton, Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, Flannery O'Conner, John Courtney Murray.
Dering J. Sprague | Lay Minister | Trenton | USA
 
I look forward to the intellectual exercise of finding new meaning from changes to the liturgy, but must these things read as if they were never vetted by a native English speaker?
Dan Houston | Lay Person | Austin | United States
 
I sadly fear this will be the straw that breaks the camel's back for the many us who have struggled with the church hierarchy and their decisions.
Margaret C. | Lay Person | Baltimore | USA
 
This is a reasonable approach to most people who have come to love and cherish the liturgy since Vatican II. The ideology that we were allowed to embrace; that our very presence and participation in the liturgy was, not only a privilege, but also a vital part of the celebration, will be seriously missed.  As a student of Vatican II, I realized my "worthiness" had nothing to do with my desire to worship and serve. I am saddened that my grandchildren may grow up learning to be hushed into a liturgy that they can't readily understand which translates into a community where they don't feel worthy to participate fully.
Carmel Pittaway | Lay Person | Charlotte, NC | USA
 
I worked in the diocese of Fairbanks in the area of liturgy, serving on the Diocesan Liturgical Commission from 1973 to 1990, the last ten years as Chair. I also served for ten years as the Director of Worship for the diocese. I applaud you for your stand. I really think we need to take it one step further and say: What If We Just Say No. The new texts are not only awkward but an insult to our intelligence and called and giftedness as the people of God. I would encourage you to stop saying "the Church says" but instead "Rome says" We are the Church. Thank-you. Joyce M. Potter
Joyce M. Potter | Lay Person | Fairbanks, Alaska | United States
 
Thank you for this opportunity to be heard. I have read several articles and a book, which give all the changes for the people, and I agree. The translations are not in keeping with the directness and power of the English language. To introduce this all at once at the first Sunday of Advent is to just hope that the people will accept this. But this Missal did not come from the people clamoring for something better than what they already have. It came from a person or small group of persons in the Vatican. We will see what happens in November..
Carol Tures | Lay Person | Nashville | USA
 
I am well versed in theology and believe the Lord guided the church in Vatican II. There was a need to change, and to create honest discussion with people as they integrate life with faith. Language is very important, we think in language. It is essential that everyday language is used when transmitting meaning. The New Missal is anything but "everyday" in the use of language; it might be true to the Latin but is it true to the meaning of the faith? I fear the New Missal is an attempt to return to a nostalgic past which really never existed. There never was a pristine time, and turning back the clock is not going to result in "truth".
Nicholas G. Brogno | Lay Person | Scranton | USA
 
Let's do more than wait; let's just stop!
Peggy Desmond | Lay Person | Sacramento | USA
 
In the face of all that we are witnessing in our world today, how is this archaic translation from Latin to English of our Eucharistic celebration of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus relevant? Jesus spoke to the people in His own language. He did not speak in Latin! I am deeply saddened by the authoritarian, non-inclusive "Powers that BE" that are refusing to allow the SPIRIT and energy of Vatican II to become more vibrant in our times. Why have our Bishops surrendering their authority?
Edith A. Hart | Religious | New York | USA
 
I think these changes will drive people away from the church. "I have greatly sinned" makes me think I must have committed a mortal sin every week. Really?? Beat my chest and say, "my fault, my fault, my most grievous fault?" Do I have to beat myself up every Sunday and feel like I'm a bad person. I don't think I'm a bad person. My friends that go to their protestant churches seem to be praising God with smiles. Hmmm. Maybe I'll check out The Chapel next Sunday.
Catherine Shannon | Lay Person | Chicago | USA
 
Please Lord, Show me the way. You are suffering again at the hands of your own. I don't want to leave, but I can hardly in conscience stay. My Faith experience is rooted in the Church. How can I stay when I know this destruction of the liturgy is false and unfaithful to all that you gave us by your life. The words do not speak to us they will turn more people away. What am I called to do?
Jacqueline Hayes | Lay Person | Santa Rosa, California | USA
 
I am a young adult who is active in the Catholic Church. I believe that these changes are going to further alienate young adults from the church because many of us perceive the Church to be "out of touch" with us. There are many problems in the Catholic Church right now. Why do we need to make a change that is going to alienate more people rather than bring members of the Church together?
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Youngstown | USA
 
I have read parts of the new translation and believe they will negate some of the effects Vatican II had on our Sunday celebrations. I am not opposed to change, but upon reading the new translation, believe these changes are awkward and confusing. It will give some an excuse to leave our Church. Let the English-speaking bishops find a way to be true to the spirit of the texts without making our liturgy less prayerful. I believe lex orandi lex credendi, but this translation is not expressing clearly what I believe.
Cherie Haefner | Lay Minister | Fort Worth | USA
 
So much for the rights of the national episcopal conferences. The Tertio Typica is the Roman reconquest of the West.
Lewis D Crusoe | Lay Person | Gaylord | USA
 
The People of God have not lost their voices, however, their so-called shepherds have lost theirs.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Phoenix | USA
 
I am a member of our parish Liturgical Council and as such am expected to fall into line with these translations, but I too have felt this to be a step backward away from allowing people to pray in their vernacular in a natural way and I also suspect that it is an attempt to dismantle Vatican II. But I have often been reminded that the Catholic Church is not a democracy and that our role is to be submissive, even as I believe that the church is the people, not the institution. In addition to signing this petition, I will turn it over to God in prayer. God is the One I trust!
Anonymous | Lay Person | Santa Rosa, CA | USA
 
As a novelist and teacher of writing, I believe that if the words of scripture are to lodge in the heart, they must possess clarity and grace. A translation that clings to literal equivalents often reads like illiterate assembly instructions for products made in a foreign country. What's needed is a translation sensitive to the rhythms of English speech, not one written not by a committee of theologians obsessed only with doctrinal purity but by a poet, with a poet's passion for language and a poet's respect for economy, accuracy and nuance. I also object to this new translation on the grounds that its arbitrary imposition betrays of the spirit of Vatican II.
Thomas Gavin | Lay Person | Hartford, CT | United States
 
Wish I had known about this sooner.
Shirley Vaughn | Religious | San Antonio | USA
 
I know that the new translation is now a done deal but I would still like to register my opposition to this new translation
kathleen skinner | Lay Minister | Archdiocese of New York | USA
 
I am sorry to see that Father Ryan now sees the implementation of the new translation as inevitable. It merely hastens the separation of the Body of Christ from the body of christ. I am saddened, disheartened, and grieving for a renewal in the church.
Ben Ament | Lay Minister | Diocese of St. Cloud, MN | USA
 
Translations like the Jerusalem Bible are excellent, and here we go - from the sublime.... to the ridiculous....
Vivian S. Gilbreth | Lay Person | Kansas City-St. Joseph | USA
 
Spirit of Wisdom, You must breathe deeply and perhaps not so gently!
Louise Lyons | Lay Minister | Belleville, Illinois | USA
 
Thanks Fr. Mike for initiating this petition. I agree, the laity's voices will need to be heard to let the powers that be know how this translation affects their celebration of Mass. I can hear Jesus saying " this was not my idea"! Peace be with us all. Dianne
Dianne Nixon | Religious | Oakland | USA
 
God help the Church.
Eric Thompson | Lay Person | Boston | USA
 
I fail to see harm to my faith by continuing to worship as I have in the past. The distraction of this change will be significant and avoidable. Changing these words and phrases are not needed as much as other issues that could really improve the Church. We need to move forward, not backward.
Thomas Colvin | Lay Person | Toledo, Ohio | USA
 
As a retired English teacher, I am distressed; as a Catholic who has been through many language changes, each promising the "real" translation, I am amused (!) But, there are so many bigger issues in our church that while I am signing this, I wish we would deal with other things. To paraphrase - Rearranging the words, while Rome burns.......
Sr. Mary Denis Maher | Religious | Cleveland, OH | USA
 
The Church has so many other important issues to face that a translation process sanctifying a return to Latin seems not only pointless, but needlessly mean spirited. The process is little more than a convoluted attempt to repeal the reforms of Vatican II and is ham fisted as well. Perhaps the Church ought to focus a bit more on its sexual abuse crisis as a betrayal of the people of God or on the process by which it has selected, trained, educated and protected thousands of priest serial abusers. That would be more meaningful than directing the use of new words such as "consubstantial" which no one understands and which will not enhance Mass. In fact, will we still have Mass if there are not enough priests left to say it?
Anonymous | Lay Person | Atlanta | United States
 
We the people are His Church. We can best express our love of the Lord in our native tongue. What purpose can this change serve other than to distance us from the light let in by Vatican II and to attempt to establish an even stronger authoritarian presence for the Bishops. First they turn a blind eye to the abuse of our young, then they tell us we must worship with the words they provide. Do they honestly think the "Catholics Come Home" advertising campaign will work? Blessings, One Extremely Disillusioned Catholic
Denise Siemers | Lay Person | Des Moines | US
 
I just want to show my support, inevitable as the result may be.
Rita Bray | Religious | Gary | USA
 
Another attempt to separate the people from their Church.
Barbara Sinnott | Lay Person | St Petersburg, FL | USA
 
I work with young people who are totally and unequivocally against what they refer to as unnecessary changes in the liturgical language. Why fix what isn't broken?? Maybe a small test group will prove the futility of these proposed changes in the liturgy...?? Then only "many" would be affected rather than "all."
Anonymous | Priest | Raleigh | USA
 
I not only support waiting on the new Roman missal, I support just saying NO on the new translation! Besides being a family physician, I am also studying for a Masters Degree in Spirituality. I have had 4 years of Latin in my education. Latin does not translate well into English. The new translation is elitist and continues to treat women as 2nd class citizens. The new translation is clumsy and misleading, e.g., did Jesus die for all(as in our present translation) or for many(as in the more literal translation that is being forced on us)? Why are single men with limited life experience the only ones allowed to have a voice in the Roman Catholic Church???
Dr Rosemary Eileen McHugh | Lay Person | Joliet / Chicago | USA
 
I am a faithful Roman Catholic for all 56 years of my life. But I am seriously concerned. I do not want this to be an occasion for separation and division in our church. I hope this has been better thought out than I can perceive and that there will be excellent catechesis to start this.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Archdiocese of Oklahoma City | USA
 
What lies at the heart of the new missal is an attempt at entrenching a new clericalism that undermines the church as the People of God. In the wake of widespread clerical scandal this represents a thinly veiled project to return to a time of priestly authority and lay subservience. I cannot in good conscience support the new missal.
Thomas Pabreza | Lay Minister | Kalamazoo | United States
 
Having read explanations of the new translation in our diocesan newspaper, I've been more convinced of the clunky often obscure language. As I learned in Latin class many years ago, literal translations are often not accurate translations. The poetry is often lost and the meaning obscured.
Lynne M Frazier | Lay Minister | Fort Wayne - South Bend | US
 
In many instances, the language of this new translation seems contrived or artificial. It does not seem natural to me as a native English-speaker. I understand the Latin roots of the Roman Catholic mass, but I do not understand why our prayers and responses during the mass must be literal translations from Latin, a dead language. By enforcing a strict literal translation from Latin to English, the language of the new liturgy elevates form over substance. This is wrong. To encourage sincere and full participation in the mass, the translation should be meaningful. That is, the English-language mass should not be so literal in translation from its Latin predecessor that it obscures the meaning of the words being used.
Russ Wheeler | Lay Person | Oklahoma City | USA
 
As a member of the newly formed Association of Catholic Priests in Ireland i feel it is time that the voices of clergy and lay people are heard. In this day age it is so sad that our leaders still will not listen and dialogue.
Tim Hazelwood | Priest | Cloyne | Ireland
 
My blood has been boiling since I had my first glimpse of this new translation. Just as the transition to the vernacular was tested and tweaked before its implementation--though admittedly not given adequate notice to the faithful--this needs to be tested among the faithful today. I suspect it won't happen though because the Church already knows that given a choice the people will not want this no matter how much catechesis is done to put a "happy face" on it.
John Knippel | Lay Minister | Charlotte, NC | USA
 
Having translated books from French to English some years ago, three well and one badly, I am astounded by the lack of quality in the new translation. Either the present Missal should be retained or a translation of the highest quality developed by people who are true experts in theology, Greek, Latin and English.
Michael C. OBrien | Lay Person | Seattle | United States
 
So what the hierarchy is implying is that, despite the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Vatican II got it wrong and that they are going to put things right. How unbelievably arrogant.
Dennis Elwell | Lay Person | Seattle, WA | USA
 
The new translation discourages the understanding of Christ's message by adding a layer of grandiosity and pomp that is unnecessary and confusing. Look to Christ himself in any of the gospels as the model for simple, direct prayer of a people to their God. God the Father doesn't need the extra praise. But we humans need a way to understand how to reconcile our daily lives with our best instincts for the divine. Spirituality is more important than religiosity. And direct, simple communion with God in our own humble words is the best way to get there.
Patrick O'Brien | Lay Person | Chicago | US
 
This seems like change for the sake of change. Such tinkering is just annoying. I do not think it will make a bit of difference in the quality of anyone's worship. We'll have an ongoing chorus of mixed responses. What a waste of years of time that could have been used to examine much more relevant issues.
Peg McNamara | Lay Person | Lafayette,Indiana | US
 
It is with great dismay that I am watching my church fall apart when is should be growing. Taking the steps backwards will drive the wedge that will split and splinter this church. As is usual, those in power and authority make choices for those whom they deem to be the "faithful flock" without consulting or caring what is thought by those they lead. I was born into a Catholic church that spoke Latin, had a priest celebrate with his back to us. Where rails separated people from God, and women were treated as less than men. The changes in the church brought God closer to the people. It is with sorrow on my part that I can tell you that if the trend continues, I know I will not leave this life as a Roman Catholic. After 54 years, what is happening in my church brings to mind the two words of the shortest sentence in the bible. Jesus Wept! So do I.
Ron Renquin | Lay Person | Green Bay | United States of America
 
I think "Catholics Come Home" is a tough sell when there is little to come home to. The reason I remain Catholic is so I can, in some way, help to get our faith back to where Jesus intended. I pray for the spread of Christianity, especially to those who hold office in the Catholic Church.
Linda A. Vottero | Lay Person | Chicago | USA
 
I have been a Practicing Catholic for 51 years, & I have never questioned my faith or my Bishop or even my Pope in matters relating to Mother Church however today I am greatly concerned with the changes being forced upon us to our Mass. These changes will only alienate us further form Mother Church, Not to mention our youth who no longer practice their faith because they view the Mass & the Church as not relevant to today's life, hence today's serious lack of Men & women willing to undertake Religious Life . Surely to God our Church leaders must realize this & be looking at making the Mass relevant to the wider community of 2010 & not send us hurtling back into the Dark Ages. I pray I do not loose my faith in you my leaders.
John Walsh | Lay Person | Brisbane | Australia
 
I am a translator, and the stilted and awkward language of the new translation makes me shudder. It is true that the currently used translation is not very inspiring, and if we have to accept a new translation, what would be wrong with giving the already existing 1998 translation another look? This new translation is a slave to Latin structure, and it does not work! A good translation, even in liturgy, must find its way between a "dynamic" rendering and a "formal" one. If we insist on either-or, we end up with either the somewhat sloppy and inspiring current translation (dynamic), or with this new, stilted, unspeakable monstrosity (formal). The 1998 translation combined the two approaches, and the result was elegant as well as understandable. It was also approved by the English-speaking bishops, and one has to wonder why the Vatican refused to have it implemented.
Eleonore Mitchell | Lay Minister | Archdiocese of Seattle | USA
 
Attended a workshop on the implementation of the 3rd edition of the Roman Missal.....I just don't think the kinks are worked out yet. .....plus the fact that I feel I missed the reason for revising the Missal in the first place?????
Barbara Wentworth DHM | Religious | St. Louis | USA
 
We wish to see mutual cooperation and shared decision making in the Church rather than typical autocratic attitude of this nature. There is no mutual participation of religious and laity and their mutual consensus in these changes. God, through Isaiah foresaw this over 2500 ago and that is why HE said in Isaiah 29:13 "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men". Do you think Jesus said things with no meaning or without any reason? He too prophesied about them in Mathew 15:8 repeating what Isaiah said "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me" What else can we do rather than agreeing with Isaiah and the Lord?
Nimal Perera | Lay Person | Colombo | Sri Lanka
 
I have just re-read the article by Fr. Michael G. Ryan that was written nearly a year ago, "What If We Said, 'Wait'"?. It is one of those meaningful things I read that I put aside to pray over, look at, ponder, etc., and it surfaced in my pile of reading, now almost a year later. I am just as astounded today as I was last December/January (perhaps even more so) when I first learned of the decision to "undo" more of what was undertaken over 45 years ago. All of what the hierarchy has done in the past 20-30 years, and has decided to do now is not only disrespectful of the 2nd Vatican Council, but is fighting against the movement of the Spirit that influenced and directed the Bishops who adopted and passed the conciliar documents of the 2nd Vatican Council. Control and Power seem to be at the core of the actions currently being undertaken by the Vatican. "We will do what we want to do regardless of how this may impact the (church) faithful in the pew. I am greatly saddened by this and many other (recent) actions by the hierarchy, and must admit that continuing to be (Roman) Catholic is becoming more and more difficult. Our diminishing numbers is no great surprise.
Wayne Olson | Lay Person | St Paul/Minneapolis, Minnesota | USA
 
thank you for the excerpts. I find the English cumbersome and awkward. Are the office holders in Rome confounding "mystery" with mystification? It seems as though they are trying to obfuscate the Good News of Jesus Christ instead of revealing the Good News in the language people will easily comprehend. Do the office holders really want to exert their control over the message with this linguistic duplicitousness? McCluan was right, I think: the medium (impenetrable, idiotic language) is the message (we, not Jesus, got it right).
joan lenardon | Lay Minister | london, ontario | canada
 
I just heard about this at choir practice. Are you kidding? Doesn't the Church have more important things to do at this point in it's history??? I am 64 years old - of our many Catholic friends - very few even go to Church. Do you think this change in words is going to bring them back? I don't know anyone in their 30s or 40s who go to Church. Why don't you spend your time trying to get people back to the Church instead of this farce. You need to open your eyes - see who is unemployed or starving and not waste your time and money on this. This may be the last straw for me. The Episcopalian Church is looking better and better.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Diocese of Rockville Centre, NY | USA
 
I am 73 years old and dismayed and alarmed at this retrogressive step. I lived through Vatican II when the Pope and bishops, with the grace that comes from the Holy Spirit, led us forward to a Mass that was in our language as we spoke it. We needed no one to help us understand the words. They were plain for all to see. Now we are back with archaic syntax and words that are never used (oblation, consubstantial). PLEASE hold back on this translation, although I fear that someone will come up with a few 'thees' and 'thous' if it occurs to them in the meantime.
Mrs Patty Hickson | Lay Person | East Anglia | UK
 
I cannot abide the poor language of this new edition. In 90% of the cases, the wording is more awkward than before. To state my principal concerns: 1) The Penitential Act is an invitation to self-flagellation, requiring the faithful to cop to having "greatly" sinned each week. There is no longer any sense of degree. 2) Our beautiful Creed has been stripped of its poetry, and the horrible word "consubstantial" betrays any pastoral common sense. "One in being with the Father" was far preferable. 3) In addition, the smaller changes show a complete lack of an ear for English. "Visible and invisible" is far inferior to "Seen and unseen". 4) Lastly - and perhaps most importantly - the tedious minor changes in the Eucharistic Acclamations and Gloria will result in the assembly having to throw out years of learned music and repertoire - for no ostensible gain, other than a slavishly literal word-for-word translation of the Latin. It is interesting, in their alleged advantages column, that the authors say this translation is not "slavishly" faithful to the Latin. The reason they go out of their way to state such a negative is because it so clearly is just that: a tone-deaf, pedestrian, stultified expression of what should be our joyous celebration of the Lord in our lives. If these changes are brought to pass, there will be a liturgical tsunami of a backlash, and our current disenchanted believers will leave the church in droves.
John V. Linton | Lay Minister | Louisville | USA
 
I feel the changes to the liturgy are a continuation of the trend to separate the "holy of worship" from our daily lives. As I see it, Jesus worked to help us see the holy in our ordinary way of doing things. How does the use of awkward translations of Latin help the liturgy? I am struggling with with my own anger at what is being foisted upon us by out-of-touch clerical bureaucrats. I fear that Mass will become an occasion of anger for me.
Jim Michaud | Lay Person | Cincinnati | USA
 
I am so sad and frustrated to see the trying to go back to pre Vatican II ways. We have a new pastor, who has been in my parish only 3 months and is changing everything to fit his personal needs. So frustrating!!!
Pat Donovan | Lay Minister | Fall River | USA
 
I have been watching this for some time now. I think it's a horrendous mistake and pray that the laity and clergy will have the courage to stand up and speak for translations that are understandable and grammatically correct. After all, WE are educated people and WE are the Church!!!
Paul McDonnell | Lay Minister | Spokane | USA
 
In the preparations for Pope Benedict's visit to the UK I am really disappointed that our worship (our very "core business") seems to be railroaded by the imposition of a text that is untested. This is not a case of "Father Knows Best" as Father simply cannot know how so many diverse groups use English and Father is not telling me Jesus used the word "chalice." (Please Lord, tell me I do not need to run an innuendo check for folk in Liverpool! )Please, we are trying not to be disillusioned with our faith as it is. Don't make it harder by hi-jacking our capacity to worship authentically.
J Drummond | Priest | Liverpool | UK
 
I'm signing up late because I just learned of this website. I believe that we, as the Church, need more of a say in our liturgy.
Carol Sauceda | Lay Person | Santa Barbara | USA
 
remember the Beatles song: "Fr. Mc Kenzie writing the words of a sermon that no one will hear." Isn't it time to ask poets, creative writers, women to write language for liturgy. The "prayers, responses- etc are gray words, bloodless, lacking passion or meaning- "does anyone really care."
rich broderick | Priest | albany, ny | usa
 
As a young lay minister, aspiring Catholic academic, and one discerning religious life, I feel I must stand against the changes as they now stand. The lines "and also with your spirit" and "consubstantial with the Father" especially astound me. Both are not only unnecessarily archaic, but are more likely to lead to confusion among Catholics than an increased prayer life. The connotations of "spirit" and "consubstantial" are more often out of sync with Catholic theology and philosophy than not. As a student of Latin, literature, and philosophy, I understand the goal behind the changes; however, I believe they fail to meet that goal as they are. English is a language now even further from Latin in many ways; the attempt to translate not just words but stress patterns and syntactical elements seems ludicrous to me. I would think that the single-most philosophically rigorous and collectively-well-educated religious institution in the Western world (arguably in the whole world) would have more sense than this.
Nicholas Courtney | Lay Minister | Diocese of Baton Rouge, Louisiana | USA
 
I am a liturgical musician. I personally have heard congregations become "singing congregations" during my 56 years of being involved in the ministry ,which was principally in Houston where I played in many different parishes. I recently went to an NPM convention where I was disturbed to see the major publishers marketing the "translations" with their usual enthusiasm, which is understandable, of course. My reaction was simply to say STOP. WAIT is more reasonable, I must admit. Thank you for your work. I'll pass the information along to my community and other friends.
Sister Jane Conway | Religious | Fort Worth, Texas | USA
 
As a cantor, I see that the people are barely beginning to learn the Mass settings. Now, we are going to change them? I wonder if there are not more important things in the world the Church should concern itself with. With so few Catholics at Mass already, should we now send more off to the land of the alienated?
Patricia Marx | Lay Minister | Diocese of Scranton | USA
 
The 'new' language is old-fashioned even to me, a septuagenarian. We've lost most of our younger people, not just teenagers but under 50s even. Will this archaic language help to attract them back to the church? As an ex English teacher I know that most youngsters won't begin to understand it.
Toni Salmonson | Lay Person | Clifton | UK
 
I am a teacher in a Catholic school, and feel that my speaking out on this issue could put my job at risk. That is why I request that you display my name as anonymous on the signature list. But I am so very weary of the increased use of the Latin Mass propers, the deliberate emphasis on hymns that are mournful, stoic and dismal, not being able to STAND when I declare my AMEN to the great doxology and Eucharistic Prayer, and being told, in effect that worship needs to be more individual and focused toward the altar and away from the assembly! This effort at re-thinking the change in the Roman Missal is a good place to start evaluating what is happening! Thank you and God Bless your efforts!
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Seattle | USA
 
I am planning to be confirmed in the diocese of Saint Cloud despite the new translation, which almost kept me from making this decision. As a linguist, I remain deeply disturbed by this movement from meaning-based to word-based translation, which seems, from everything I've heard said in its favor, to reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of what a good translation is. I have decided to put my hope in the continuous reformability of the Church even when it sometimes moves in the wrong direction. The flying leap that it made in the right direction with the Vatican II affirmation of vernacular languages, and the restoration of true catholicity along with that, gives me a basis for such a hope. I can't imagine going to Mass in this new form without grieving over a certain degree of catholicity and incarnation that seems to get lost in the translation; my consolation is simply to see it in a larger perspective as a comparatively small step.
Julia Smucker | Lay Person | Saint Cloud | USA
 
Please give the laity a voice in this decision. We are called upon to serve more and more as the number of priests declines. And we eagerly serve the Church that we love and cherish so much. Please give us a voice in this matter. If our service and dedication are needed in the work of the Church, then surely the value of our opinions on the language of the new Roman Missal of the Church should not be casually dismissed nor should they be ignored. A 'trial run' does not seem to be an unreasonable request.
Julianne S. Battaile | Lay Person | Jackson, Ms. | USA
 
Having read the three versions of the pieces shown, I find the 1998 version much more acceptable in almost all cases - and, in those very few instances where it would not be my first choice the the current version is preferred to the new, proposed translation. I like to understand what I am saying to God.
Peter Henderson | Lay Person | Brentwood | England
 
Every change I read about makes my heart feel heavier. As the director of music ministries for our parish all I can think about is how terribly affected parishioners will be by changes made in our beautiful traditional songs at mass. Please wait on this, wait a few lifetimes if possible!
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Palm Beach | USA
 
I recently attended a workshop on this new translation in our diocese and came away most disappointed. Rome and the critics of the present usage are going to extremes and are making this process an absurdity. We really need a much more refined process and some of these newer prayers need reworking and much better , not translations, but much more meaningful wording. Many of the prayers which we received are very poor. Please wait!!!! and do the correct thing. Millions of dollars will be spent on new books, new printings, etc. Why waste all this money for a very poor translation???
John S. Wintermyer | Priest | Archdiocese of Washington, WDC | USA
 
I far prefer the 1998 ICELl translation as closer to contemporary English in the USA. Its choice of words. less periphrastic style, and lucid form of prayer are much clearer and more effective than the proposed translation. In any event, I think we should test out the recently 'approved' translation, as suggested in this e-mail before finally choosing it over the 1998 ICEL translation which was initially the one favored by the majority oft American bishops.
Paul J. Bernadicou SJ | Priest | Archdiocese of Los Angeles | United States
 
The 2010 translation is clumsy, lacks elegance and inhibits prayer in that it would be a perpetual distraction. It is pompous, lacks euphony and carries over the worst traits of Latin prose into English. It simply does not work. It is language which excludes people from real prayer. The process that resulted in this translation is typical of the ivory tower arrogance which contributed to the sex abuse crisis.
brian long | Lay Person | melbourne | australia
 
"And with your Spirit." We have spent years trying to do away with the dichotomy between body and soul so that we could view the human person as one. Now we are separating the spirit out again? How many steps can we take backward without falling off of the cliff?
Betty Pitera | Lay Person | Arlington | USA
 
It's a mess! Let's use the 1998
peter wieneke | Priest | broken bay | australia
 
I totaly agree with the others who have signed
Richard Tobias | Lay Minister | St.Mary's Defiance Ohio | USA
 
HAVING TRAVELED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE ENGLISH SPEAKING WORLD AND HEARD SOME DISTRESSING REACTIONS I ACTUALLY FEEL WE NEED STOP AND NOT JUST WAIT..
MARGARET BOWSKILL | Religious | JOHANNESBURG | SOUTH AFRICA
 
I wrote to "The Southern Cross" over a year ago to express my feelings that the new wordings were mainly cosmetic, changes in word order and unnecessary etc, and that the COST of having to buy new missals etc was yet another huge reason why this pedantic exercise was not acceptable - my views remain the same!
E.D. HINTON | Lay Person | Gauteng | South Africa
 
After reading some of the proposed changes, I am deeply saddened
sean ryan | Lay Person | Palmerston North | New Zealand

I do not understand the rationale for the changes, or the rush to implement them. I agree with the statement above, try some selected parishes to test their effectiveness.
William Hamill, O.S.A. | Priest | Tulsa | USA
 
We don't need a new translation of the missal. We need a church that is spiritual and instructs its people in spirituality, not externalisms. Let us not resort to the likes of the Scribes and Pharisees and be concerned about the words and symbols of the exterior, but rather be concerned with spirituality and the Creator.
Mrs. Joan Mahon | Lay Person | Charlotte, NC | USA
 
I am very concerned that I have only just learned about the controversy over this new translation. I had previously been aware that a new translation was in the process of being prepared, but knew no more about it. I am even more concerned to have been told that the priests in some UK Dioceses have been told not to talk about the new translation.
Jeanne Roberts | Lay Person | Middlesbrough | England
 
It boggles the mind to think that at a time when more and more people, especially youth, feel they do not need or are not fed by the institutional church, that those who are charged with 'shepherding' the faithful would turn backwards and grab onto an ancient language, unfamiliar metaphors, and silted syntax in order to renew a sense of mystery in the celebration of Eucharist that they say has been lost to the spirit of Vatican II. We all know how powerful language and image can be when it comes to inspiring and motivating people to action or awe-filled meditation. We need look no further that the current political landscape and rhetoric to see the evidence . How is my "roof" going to be prepared for the Lord to come under it? The word "consubstantial" slips so easily off the tongue. No doubt the 3X "mea culpa" will make me more aware of my grievous faults. Those are just a few of the obvious disconnects that the congregation will encounter while celebrating mass from the pews. When one turns to the orations used by the celebrant the incongruities of image and symbol along with the tongue twister syntax will all but sever any connection between priest and people. So if I understand the reasoning of our bishops; while youth and young adults flock to non-denominational mega churches where they feel the service and Word speaks to them in words that have meaning for their life now and many adults just stop attending Church except to mark out those important life milestones, the Catholic Church is going to return to relevance by more accurately and authentically translating the latin of the "Novus Ordo." This will return the mystery to the Mass? This will reconnect our mind, body and imagination to the ineffable? People leave the Catholic Church for other churches because there they "feel" they have some connection to the worship and they do mission, they do service. People want to experience their faith on many different levels, heart, ands, and mind. Finally in the end I believe that this will only further fracture a Church that at the moment seems to be divided into a least two, a pre and post Vatican II understanding. Those who want to remain within the Roman Catholic Church will begin traveling to parishes where the priest and worship reflect their own sensibilities. There will be a large number of parish communities that will shape their own liturgy, taking what they like and ignoring what they don't. All one has to do is so how different each parish has differing postures from the time following the priest washing his hands to the final blessing and dismissal. On any given Sunday you will find varied gestures of standing, sitting, kneeling, raising hands, and holding hands regardless of what the rubrics say. The only people who will find new meaning in these changes are the "liturgy" police who will have new fodder and fuel to ignite their passions and send off letters to bishops, cardinals, priests, and of course like minded websites and publication. All of them on a divine crusade to tell us what it really means to be "Catholic." We pray that the widows of the Church still haven't been shut tight and again the Spirit will find a way to open them again and renew the faithful.
Martin Singer | Lay Person | Archdiocese of Detroit | US
 
On the basis of the extracts you have provided, the 1998 translation is clearly superior. With respect to the existing translation, it has more punch, more specificity, is less woolly. Plus it has more actual content - the existing one can be a bit patchy. But what strikes one most is the clarity and elegance of the English, which it achieves without being 'arch'. The new translation meets the requirement of content and specificity, and is reasonably clear. But does not read like anything a native speaker would write. I think it will lead to a lot of puzzled faces in church.
Nicholas Hardie | Lay Person | Portsmouth | England
 
Why...
Justin Bishop | Lay Minister | Great Falls-Billings | USA
 
I am dismayed at the way a new translation is to be foisted on us. As a member of WATAC I have been informed of the action and the resistance to the change and I support grassroots action wholeheartedly
Mary Robertson | Lay Person | Broken Bay | Australia
 
This will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. There is nothing pastoral in this translation. It is all about power and control. We are in a transition time in our world and there is real concern for the direction the institutional church is heading.
Barbara Holowczak | Lay Person | Chicago, IL | USA
 
This seems a very sensible idea, but are there enough bishops courageous enough to do anything about it? Please God there are!
Mrs. Michelle Guy | Lay Person | Brisbane | Australia
 
This is evidence of the sensus fidelium, is it not?
Tracey Edstein | Lay Person | Maitland-Newcastle | Australia
 
Instead of turning inward and cultivating an elitist philosophy the church should be turning to the community in which it lives and seeking to become more accessible. If we wish to be heard on important issues we should be seen to be a contemporary, open institution.
John Gordon | Lay Person | Melbourne | Australia
 
If Benedict XVI would like to see a smaller church that matches the conservative bent of his papacy, this is a good way to start. I am a convert (1984), answering the call of God. I can't imagine these changes as bringing "leavers" back or inviting new converts if the language is so obscure.
Bev Burch | Lay Person | La Crosse | United States
 
I am very concerned that this "new" translation will discourage full and active participation, especially among our youth. So many young people are already being attracted to churches who use modern language to convey a message and vibrant Christian music to inspire. I am not saying we should follow that lead, but the beautiful liturgy we currently celebrate should not so easily be set aside.
Cheryl Broussard | Lay Person | Las Vegas | USA
 
Considering all that is going on in the Church at this painful time, now, more than ever, we need to WAIT on the implementation of the new Roman Missal.
Joanne Downs | Lay Person | Kansas City - St. Joseph (Missouri) | United States
 
The proposed texts are unproclaimable and unintelligible. Please stop and rethink before you make a big mistake. What's wrong with the shelved 1998 ICEL texts, they were very worthy!
Bob Sinclair | Lay Person | Westminster | England
 
The language is cold and formal and does not convey God's abiding love for us. This is not a good time for such a change.
Bernadette Flynn | Lay Person | Elphin | Ireland
 
This is a major change that just might be at the wrong time. We are going through a severe issue with sexual misconduct that has touched even the highest ladder in the church. This just may be the straw that breaks the camels back. We do not need an uprising, lost of interest, misunderstanding that this might bring about. We should steady the ship before approaching more storms. Try it in certain areas and see how it is accepted or not. This could cause a severe split in the church, especially between the older members, newer members, and other ethnics let alone outsiders saying how we are in such turmoil.
Peter J. Manfredi | Lay Person | St. Coleman | USA
 
I was in Washington with a priest who had worked on the translation that was thrown out. When asked to interpret in this manner he refused. What they threw away without serious consideration was amazing. Those scholars worked extremely long and hard to deliver to the church a true and beautiful interpretation. I'm very scared for the spirit and soul of my church. I can only speculate as to the reasons why it was disregarded and pray that the people speak loud enough to help bring these powerful people to their collective senses.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Youngstown | USA
 
I will be 50 years ordained next year but still doing weekend ministry etc. I would like to be able to say that I am unable to believe that our bishops are pushing this this user inimical, antiquated verbiage through our ears and down our throats.....but the truth is that I am not surprised at all! They see themselves as being powerless and I fear they like it that way....not all of them , BUT A HOST OF THEM! The anti-Second Vatican Council forces are making a sick joke out of the vernacular and reducing our liturgical texts to the arcane "through their most grievous fault ."
Peter Timmins | Priest | Retired | Ontario Canada
 
While I am neither a liturgist nor a linguist, it was evident to me that many of the translated passages were not only unwieldy but grammatically incorrect. I found myself getting caught up in simply trying to read the words while the meaning of the text was completely lost. While Latin is a beautiful language and is often difficult to effectively translate into English, my praying of the liturgy would be significantly hampered if the proposed changes were enacted without further consideration. It is the responsibility of ALL the People of God to make our prayer the best it can be.
M Kevin Stemmle | Lay Person | Louisville, KY | USA
 
I agree with everything that Michael Ryan has said. Many of my parishioners have English as a Second Language. I don't fancy imposing something on any of my parishioners which I cannot accept myself. English is the most beautiful of languages, full of poetry and grace. The New English Roman Missal has no poetry and no grace.
Christopher Sheehy | Priest | Sydney | Australia
 
What if we just ignore it?
Theresa Buggy | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
In a review of the sample translations, I feel that in general they are wordy, clumsy, too difficult and is a discredit to the Church . I also feel that the new translations will cause division and controversy among lay people in the Catholic Church in America and sadly result in more Catholics not attending Mass. I feel lay people should have more voice in how we pray and firmly agree with the market testing philosophy to wait for results prior to implementing changes. Peace and Amen! Parish Council Chair
Joan M. Echsner | Lay Person | Archdiocese of Louisville | United States of America
 
"What If We Just Said Wait" is a well thought-out essay, balancing respect for church authority with an affection for well-phrased, authentic translation.
Dixon B. Rice | Lay Person | Helena (Montana) | USA
 
I am dismayed and totally depressed by the "backward steps" being taken by this revision.
Marie Landers | Religious | Toronto | Canada
 
I think this is a worthwhile suggestion. It is not disobedient but worthy of an adult community.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Washington, DC | United States
 
I am a pastoral liturgist, graduated from the Paul VI Institute of Liturgy, Bukidnon, and currently an incoming senior of M.A. in Liturgy in San Beda College Graduate School of Liturgy, Manila. "We are convinced that adopting translations that are highly controversial, and which leaders among our bishops as well as many highly respected liturgists and linguists consider to be seriously flawed, will be a grave mistake." I agree. And especially that a large percentage of our young people are getting bored or ignorant with the rites and prayers of our Church, the implementation of the new missal would be another way to hinder them to go to Church and appreciate our divine worship. I am with you on this movement.
Dave Ceasar Dela Cruz | Religious | Cubao | Philippines
 
I wrote to "The Southern Cross" over a year ago to express my feelings that the new wordings were mainly cosmetic, changes in word order and unnecessary etc, and that the COST of having to buy new missals etc was yet another huge reason why this pedantic exercise was not acceptable - my views remain the same!
E.D. HINTON | Lay Person | Gauteng | South Africa
 
I am angry to learn of this newest attempt to again alter the translations of the New Roman Missal. The proposed translations are wordy at best and are difficult to understand even by an educated lay person. If the intent is to discourage people from entering/remaining in the Catholic Church, then I believe it will be successful. The new translations are aloof and inaccessible to the general population. Is that what you truly believe to be the purpose of the New Roman Missal? The examples that I have read would certainly indicate that the purpose of the proposed changes are not in the best interest of lay members of the church. Rather, divisions are sure to occur. Please withdraw these changes and consider what is in the best interest of the ENTIRE church!
Terri Doucette | Lay Person | Milwaukee, WI | United States
 
Please prayerfully consider the importance of words and language we use to bring us closer to God in the way we live our faith, pray together, and interact with each other. The new translations have the potential to distance us from our faith, our God, and each other. Jesus has shown us how to LOVE one another and the language we use helps us to convey that love.
Ann Mitchell | Lay Minister | Superior | United States
 
After reading some of the proposed changes, I am deeply saddened
sean ryan | Lay Person | Palmerston North | New Zealand
 
The proposed translation seems stilted and awkward to me and in some parts not good theology. Why change something that is already working for us and is harmonious? Please table this proposed change indefinitely and work on the larger concerns of our church and society. Thank you.
Anonymous | Religious | St. Louis | USA
 
Please involve us all in any necessary changes. We have a great Laity. Don't let us drive them away.
Pat Kenny | Religious | Birmingham | England
 
I feel this is just another step backwards for the Catholic Church. One more thing it will drive more young people away from the church. The present text for the Eucharist is in a form that all ages can understand. this is just something that the conservative Hierarchy wants to force on the laity of the church.
Patrick E. O'Donnell | Lay Minister | Saint Louis Missouri | United States of America
  
Why Vatican is not giving thought to the most important aspects of worship.
Anonymous | Priest | Vijayawada | India
 
I prayerfully express my concern over what I consider steps backward in the journey of God's church.
Elizabeth Wolf | Lay Minister | Superior, Wisconsin | United States
 
Any time a change of this magnitude is done, proper introduction and education to the parishes is a must.
Gregg J. Miller | Deacon | Superior State of Wisconsin | United States
 
As a cantor/musician in our parish I have been very concerned about these changes. At this time I believe these changes would only cause confusion and frustration for many people. We need to focus on maintaining some continuity and drawing our people into worship. Give people a reason to stay Catholic, when so many are leaving.
Nancy Walz | Lay Minister | Superior | USA
 
I hope that we broaden all our discussions and that we call for a Vatican III to deal with all the problems in the Church.
Marybeth Mataya | Lay Minister | Superior, WI | St. Croix
 
I support the statement of concern detailed above.
Gary Baribeau | Lay Person | Superior | United States
 
Progress cannot be made without change... but change alone does not mean progress. The leaders of the Catholic church are making a very grievous error by, in my opinion, creating a change of wording in prayers which have served us very well over the past 45 years. The prayers that the church adopted many years ago are succinct and very much "to the point". They are reverent and holy. Leave them as they are.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Tulsa (OK) | USA
 
We need to move forward as a church, not back. Please work with us.
Bethany | Lay Person | Seattle | USA
 
To revert to the previous version of prayers seems a waste of time and money when the Church could put those efforts to better use.
Judith Niederberger | Lay Person | Madison | USA
 
Keep it English
James Demars | Lay Person | Syracyse,N.Y. | United States
 
We are a church....people of the church. Hear our voices. We do not want to return to the old missal. Yes I learned all the appropriate responses...but I never felt a part of the mass..not as I do now! I am also not fond of regressing.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | San Jose | USA
 
I thought that we were a Church for the future not the past. Do we want to encourage our young people or put them off? As a teacher I would find this translation very complicated and lacking Christ's human touch. Let's keep moving forward and not back.
Jane Littleton | Lay Minister | Southwark | England UK
 
The centurion in the Gospel told Jesus he was not worthy to have him come to his house. He wanted to spare Jesus any scandal or ridicule by having a Jew come to a pagan's house. We "remind" Jesus of our unworthiness to let him into our lives, but we implore him to help us as we live our daily lives trying to make this world a better place. This is what we pray for before communion. Why does someone want to change just because.. . .. .
William Wewers | Priest | Little Rock | United States
 
We need to keep moving FORWARD---not backward! We need new, inclusive, texts---not the Old, pre-Vatican Missal. I say--Re-think this. Stick with Vatican II and move forward!
Charlene Schaaf, C.D.P. | Religious | Denver, CO | USA
 
I quote paragraph 2 from above: "We are convinced that adopting translations that are highly controversial, and which leaders among out bishops, as well as many highly respected liturgists and linguists consider to be seriously flawed, will be a grave mistake." My sentiments exactly!
Elizabeth Farias | Lay Person | Sioux City, Iowa | USA
 
I just think that with all that is going on in our world today as well as in our Catholic Church, this is NOT the time for what seems to be frivolous change....We need to find more ways to be inclusive not ways to cause upset and confusion in our Liturgies....I just don't understand why any of it is necessary.....but certainly NOT NOW....
Nancy L Miller | Lay Person | Cincinnati | USA
 
I fear we are "a voice in the wilderness crying make way" since there appears to be a rush to finalize, but the protest must be made. What does the Vatican have to gain by this other than more alienation of the people in the pews? Do it right the first time rather than publish then correct.
Tom Hayden | Deacon | Chicago | USA
 
Attention Italian monsignors: The translations you impose will make us sound like the Church of England. Are you sure you want to do that?
Gregory Warnusz | Lay Person | Saint Louis | USA
 
Stop this nonsense! It's 40 years too late already for a NEW order of mass! Let's start over with gender neutral language and loving spirit. Stop fetishizing the "Latin" rite! It was simply one in a 2,000 year continuum of liturgical development.
Michael Bartz | Lay Person | St. Louis | USA
 
It would seem too be an enormous waste of money to change a text that is perfectly OK in these times of such great financial hardship, and when we should all be trying to save money.
Sheila Knox | Lay Person | Northampton | England
 
This new translation uses vocabulary which is too advanced for many, and will alienate and confuse less educated members of the body of Christ. the wording is ponderous and unwieldy. the current contemporary wording is simple, direct and clear, and therefore allows the listener/speaker to focus more on the meaning and thereby participate more deeply in the Mass.
janet kirby | Lay Person | chicago area | USA
 
The proposed translations are a travesty, an unwarranted Latinization and corruption of already accepted texts that have gained broad acceptance by our separated brethren and the laity at large.
Anthony P. Kowalski, Ph.D. | Lay Person | Baltimore | USA
 
Translation change seems to be a diversion to the real problems within the Church today.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Cleveland Ohio | USA
 
This seems to be a move backward based on fear. The God I know is much bigger, inclusive, and connected in a real way to people. These changes to our worship are going to further alienate the good people of our Church.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | St. Louis | USA
 
The most important idea of any language change is how well it can be understood by the people. Anything that makes it difficult or incomprehensible is certainly not an example of how Jesus spoke to his followers. We should be all about following Jesus in our method of communication.
MaryClaire Havel | Lay Person | Joliet, Il | USA
 
I pray that a wave of people come forward to voice their opposition to this change. If nothing else, scaling the intended change to target a select number of churches to evaluate the response by the laity would be best, for I concur with your suggestion.
Jennifer Smith | Lay Minister | Portland, ME | USA
 
School Board President and Member, Parish Pastoral Council, Infant Jesus of Prague, Flossmoor IL
Patrick J. Keating | Lay Person | Chicago | USA
 
This is the most ridiculous idea ever. As an English speaking person this new translation is alien to me and I will not subscribe to it. It is the most unnatural way of speaking so why not leave well alone and concentrate on the many problems facing the church at the present time.
Anonymous | Lay Person | St.Andrews and Edinburgh | Scotland UK
 
Jesus did not speak in anachronistic old fashioned language - he spoke the every day language of the ordinary people, expressing himself in words they could understand. We should be dong the same! The language used in this translation is not recognizable as modern English. The future of the Church is our young people - and particularly those now under the age of 25 who will be 40+ like us in 20 years time. The vocabulary and sentence construction is just bizarre and so inaccessible: "May the mysteries we have celebrated profit us" "Look, we pray, upon the oblation of your Church" "Through our yearly exercises in the holy season of Lent" "The solemn celebrations to come" What was wrong with the 1998 ICEL version? It looks great to me. What a huge, huge mistake is being made with this new version. What a turn-off. This is such a retrograde step. I am dismayed! What on earth has possessed our Bishops? Certainly not the Holy Spirit the bringer of life, love, joy and understanding!
Gabrielle McGarvey | Lay Minister | Portsmouth | England
 
would like everybody to have a chance to evaluate the changes and have an input as it appears we have gone backwards rather than forwards.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Southwark | England
 
When I lived at the Vatican in 1990-91, I came to know the English Benedictine friar, Cuthbert Johnson, who was an assistant in the congregation of divine worship. he would gather a small group of English monsignors to his residence in Rome to discuss what were perceived as errors in the 1974 translation promulgated by Pope Paul 6.  I remember one of the chief instigators as being monsignors Michael Sharkey and Kevin McDonald of Birmingham England. Sharkey had a particular disdain for the American sound of the universal translation ---for instance-- in the 3rd Eucharistic prayer saying --from east to west for the glory of your name, instead of the literal Latin-- from the rising of the sun to the setting thereof, the literal Latin... now the English curialists would seem to have have won the day in the new missal, and Abbot Johnson writes in the current London tablet a defense of the clique's work. that changes in the ordinary text will wipe out the current published musical mass-settings and acclamations, such as Christ has died... that are well-grained in our singing assemblies, means nothing to these former curialists. the one hope is that, since the chief pastor of the church, Benedict 16, has indicated a willingness to accept free usage of the tridentine missal, suppressed by Paul 6 decades ago, and a willingness to accept the Anglican missal and non-celibate clergy into Catholicism, the bishops of America may be urged to receive permission for all pastors whose congregations do not want the Cuthbert Johnson translations to retain indefinitely the usage of the well-accepted 1974 missal ! why not, holiness?
ejmckenna | Priest | gary | usa
 
I have just read an article in a Redemptorist Magazine about the proposed new wording for Mass and am concerned that some of the new phrases e.g. "consubstantial with the Father," "send down your Spirit like the dewfall,/" "Joseph, spouse of the same virgin" sound very peculiar, bearing in mind that the average person going to Mass today doesn't speak like that. Prayer is the lifting of the mind and heart to God. Surely we should be using words that we use every day. I love the Bible very much but I'm not sure the proposed wording is appropriate. I would love to hear that shaking hands with people during Mass is being done away with. If they want to do it before Mass - fine - but I really feel that it is an insult to God to turn to several people to shake hands with them just before we receive the Eucharist. Surely our focus should be on Him and Him alone at that point. I think not enough thought has been put into this and those of us who dearly love the Mass should be given the opportunity to voice our opinion and for it to be taken seriously. Sincerely, Denise Loftus
Denise Loftus | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
Please wait...our prayer is worth much more.
Matthew Kunkel, S.J. | Religious | Oakland | U.S.A.
 
I do not understand how this change was implemented without input from the laity.
Maureen Maguire | Lay Person | Charleston | USA
 
I feel like we are moving backwards.
Peggy Clapp | Lay Person | Jackson | US
 
I truly believe that we really need to have more say as lay people in all the aspects of this new process for the missal. I believe that it will cause more people to leave the Church because they are tired of not being involved in what the Bishops decide for all of us.
Lorraine | Lay Person | Hartford | USA
 
Thank you!
M. Teresa Barbier | Lay Person | Belleville, IL | USA
 
Any changes should be for the uplifting of the faithful at the Liturgy. Reverting to language what does not do this will seriously affect the attendance of the faithful at the Liturgy.
Elsa Roellig | Lay Person | Archdiocese of Philadelphia | USA
 
As a lay lector I have been reading with joy and enthusiasm the words of the Good News for over thirty years and it troubles me deeply to see how far the new '''translations''' are from the heartfelt messages to which we have become so closely united. The Holy Spirit must be the one who guides us in these matters; not Roman Academics whose English and Attitudes are pre-Vatican II. Jesus did not speak Greek he spoke Aramaic the language of '''the people'''; we don't need to go back to the archaic, pseudo-latinized, texts....rather we should be encouraging the Light of the Holy Spirit to give us our '''everyday bread''' : in the forms and tongues best suited to our times. We already have such an excellent translation with which the Laity are comfortable and accepting. The most recent '''translation''' is an abomination which needs to be sent back to Rome with haste.
Anonymous | Lay Person | VICTORIA | CANADA
 
The new translations are contrary to the spirit of Vatican II. For example, the forced distinction between the people and the priest. Already evident in the priest or deacon now the only ones worthy enough to purify the cups. I am a Eucharistic minister an we used to be worthy enough to do that. The new missal clearly puts us people down a peg or two. And Christ and His CHALICE? Christ used a CHALICE at the last supper! Indeed. And so on.
Robert Maegerlein | Lay Person | Winona | U.S.
 
I grew up with the old Latin Mass and learned the Latin along with my brother who was learning to be an altar server. I, and most other Catholics, welcomed the day when the Mass was said in the vernacular even if it was imperfect. Returning to awkward translations that have no or little meaning to today's younger Catholics is not the way to go, especially at a time when we struggle to get our younger families to come to Mass. Unlike my generation, where loyalty to our Catholic faith kept us coming even if we did not understand all the changes, today's generations do not have that same commitment. If they don't like it, they will either just stop going altogether or join another denomination.
Bernice Mahoney | Lay Minister | Edmonton, AB | Canada
 
Jesus spoke in the language of the people that met not some high-flown unintelligible wording. To think of changing the liturgy to something that would not be readily understood by all in the congregation is troubling. Are the there not more important problems for the Church to confront?
Anonymous | Lay Person | Providence | USA
 
Some of the translation is unintelligible, what was/is wrong with the present Missal? Why are we as "Church" wasting Earth's resources by our desire to waste/change what is already perfectly understandable? Why are the "Princes" of the Church trying to impose their ideas on the poor?
Anonymous | Religious | Clifton | United Kingdom
 
It appears we should wait. I have always been uncomfortable with Latin, what is the point of going to church if I don't understand it?
Ann Austin | Lay Person | Lansing, MI | USA
 
The changes I have seen are a retrograde step, - we need to move FORWARD & use modern day language which is understood by all. 'The People' are The Catholic Church & we need to be consulted & not have things thrust upon us. As with Politics, we should be able to vote & give an opinion.
Valerie Blackman | Lay Person | Southwark | United Kingdom
 
Not only is the translation flawed, but it is regressive. This has been in the works for 30 years - not the translation - but the attempt to restore central power to the Vatican - new wine in old wineskins...we know what will result.
William A White | Priest | Archdiocese of New York | USA
 
Please do not regress back to prior to Vatican II.
Colleen M. Stout | Lay Person | Louisville, Kentucky | United States
 
The new translations are unnecessary and will be counter-productive The Church faces many crises without creating an additional one by hasty action
Ted Weber, Jr. | Lay Person | San Francisco | USA
 
I am happily and very satisfied with the changes made at Vatican II. The Catholic Church came a long way in helping Catholics become better Christians since Vatican II. People in their own culture understood the spiritual values of the liturgy.
Cecile G. Fiederlein | Lay Person | Hartford, CT | USA
 
I cannot believe we are doing this just so it can be the way it was before. Not a valid reason to change back. ( We are rearranging the deck chairs again while the ship is sinking.) This change has many implications which apparently were never considered. 1. All the "Glory to God" music versions will become obsolete. I sing three variations with which the congregation has finally become familiar. 2. People will have to read all the responses. (Many are awkward). I smell some pre- Vatican, ultraconservative diehards at work here. Let's not let it happen.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Hartford | USA
 
Latin was not the language of Jesus. He spoke the local language and was understood. A good translator is not one who translates literally but one who expresses the meaning of the foreign language in the idiom of the time and of the people for whom the translation is made. Prayer should be meaningful and simple; accessible to all. Already the post Vatican 2 English translations need updating for a generation unaccustomed to words rarely met in their everyday life. I don't want to hear or read English which has been forced into an unnatural form of expression. Well done for setting up this petition!
Anonymous | Lay Person | Southwark | UK
 
The people's part should remain unchanged.
Gerard Flynn | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
Your comments are right on target. I support not having a new translation at all fearing that the new translation is intended to gradually lead our Church back to the Latin.
Anonymous | Religious | Worcester | US
 
Nero fiddled while Rome burned! I don't see any difference in this moment in History than what the Emperors/Hierarchy of OUR Church are doing currently. I believe the Holy Spirit will lead us to the other side of all the controversy, unrest and conservative domination by the powers that be.
Nancy Shaughnessy | Lay Person | Kansas City in Kansas | USA
 
I keep thinking, "What would Jesus do? What would Jesus want?" I don't believe he spoke to people using words that the 'common people' would not know or understand. Jesus was 'real' and 'close' to the people he spoke to. We do not lose reverence or meaningful prayer by using in our worship the 'common' language of the people. Please, re-think the purpose of this change.
Diane Lasco | Lay Person | Kansas City - St. Joseph | USA
 
Public prayer of the Church should arise from the people, not be imposed upon the people.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Denver | USA
 
Who are the ones really involved with this? Are they trying to get rid of the older generation who do worship and support the Church to reach the younger generation who want to worship their way and not have to follow any rules? There is nothing wrong with the way our prayer is and any changes will just change the translation. Leave things alone for now......
j regis | Lay Minister | London | Canada
 
Finally, we may have a voice. The reversal of the valued Vatican II principles being compromised is extremely disheartening. John XIII said that windows need to opened to let in the fresh air of the Spirit. Now these windows seem to be closing. Church leadership seems to be using its strong arm, again, to exercise control and not allowing for a variation of prayer and faith expression . My greatest concern is what is happening in our seminaries and what is being taught to our candidates preparing for ordination. It seems that many of the newly ordained operate with an attitude of PRE-VATICAN II thinking and practices. Also, to me, this thinking will only cause division and undermine thefaith of our people. Perhaps even promote the rise of small "home churches" as in the Early Church which may lack in universality and may cause confusion. I continue to pray for our leadership to consider the lasting affects of this backward move.
Leona Osbourne | Lay Person | Saginaw | USA
 
1) This translation from the Latin is poor English and is less understandable and meaningful than the English version we are currently using. 2) With all the problems the Church is facing in connection with the abuse crisis, the fact that the Hierarchy has given priority to preparing and imposing this inferior translation, is another symptom of the serious problems we have in leadership. 3) Where is the collegiality and subsidiarity which was outlined in the documents of Vatican II?
Carol Hayes-Gegner | Lay Person | Baltimore | USA
 
We continually see the doors/windows of Vatican II being slammed shut. Too bad the time spent on new translations was not spent exploring ways to reach out to your youth & young people. Am embarrassed that the Catholic Church is taking a back seat to our Protestant brethren in this regard...we see many other sects growing in numbers while many Catholic parishes' membership diminishes. Can Rome really be that clueless?
jeanne mayan | Lay Person | Saginaw | USA
 
I have reviewed the new changes and I was taken back by this exercise in nonsense. It is such stilted English and not common to how we as American think and talk. I feel it was totally unnecessary!
Bernard Dillon | Lay Minister | Diocese of New York | USA
 
Without doubt, over the past 10 years, I have enjoyed reading the Inclusive Texts of the Psalms, the Old and the New Testament. Clearly, the Vatican is so out of touch to even assume that we will go back to reading that Archaic language! Yet, how can they even consider imposing that language on today's CHILDREN!! As a result, the Church could stifle an entire generation of our Young People! WAIT! WAIT!!
Frances E. Adams | Lay Person | Chicago, Illinois | USA
 
I think the proposed translation is taking us backwards instead of forwards.
MOYRA ARCHIBALD | Lay Person | NORTHAMPTON | ENGLAND
 
Will God understand us better if we use archaic language, grammar, and syntax as the language of liturgy? Will the use of a Latinized and artificially archaicized English improve our communal and liturgical prayer or make us better Christians? Where are our bishops when we really need them to stand up for us and to insist that the language of our liturgy be in our own language and not an unfamiliar and artificial idiom which has never really existed except in the imagination of slavish and unskilled translators?
Lisa Marie Belz | Religious | Chicago | USA
 
Lets do everything we can not to have this happen. The full reality of the text is already expressed and we stand to confuse and open doubt to what is already a good thing. How can the facts (words) that have been written ever be changed.
Tracie Cavallo | Lay Person | Toronto | Canada
 
Enlightened thinking from our 'Leaders' . If young people ( particularly ) hear this sort of ridiculous English ( "...Joseph, spouse of the same virgin" for heavens sake ! ) it will really bring them flocking (forgive the pun ) back to church - not!!
Rob Young | Lay Person | Otago | New Zealand
 
Let's wait. Do these changes really affect how we know, love and serve God for the better? I think not. Why waste more money on new translations when the Church is already struggling with financial difficulties? I think that there are better uses for our time and money.
Dave Pipitone | Lay Person | Archdiocese of Chicago | USA
 
What is the rush? Why do we need changes at all? It seems to me that the Bishops, the Pope, and other Vatican administrators, bureaucrats, and other ministers and officials have way too much time on there hands. We should all be concerned abut the activity and perception of our Catholic Church in our communities, and not nit pick as to how we answer prayers, or sit, stand, kneel, during the mass. Thank you for reading / listening to me.
Thomas Thelen | Lay Person | Lansing, Michigan | USA
 
I entirely agree with the establishment of a pilot scheme. I have recently been talking with a friend about the introduction of the new missal and have come to the conclusion that the idea is to abandon the forward thinking of Vatican 2 and return to the idea that only the clergy will have any say in the way we worship. In other words the move is reactionary. Now is the time for all Catholics to unite and protect our modern liturgy.
Richard Stead | Lay Minister | Plymouth | UK
 
I am a minister of music and have spent the last 8 months rebuilding our music program and we are slowly getting some people back into church. I think that we need to think more closely about getting others back than to throw some more things at them that they will not understand. This has been very hard on our parishes and I don't need the extra work for myself. It has taken a toll on me and I could use the break. I now have 5 people involved in our music program that are accompanists and things are looking up. PLEASE WAIT!!
Jane Meyer | Lay Minister | Milwaukee | USA
 
When the disciples went out to preach at Pentecost each person heard the message in their own language therefore shouldn't we be using the spoken language of each of our own countries or areas so that the God's message is easily understood by everyone. using a translation that is cumbersome to the listeners only turns people off.
Margaret Young | Lay Person | otago | New Zealand
 
If its not okay then we can wait surely.
Trensio Kamanga | Religious | Lusaka | Zambia
 
If we have to be sensitively catechized with regard to the changes what does that say about its suitability for use!
Anonymous | Lay Person | A and B | England
 
I believe the most important thing needed in the translation is to convey the message of the Roman missal in words that are easily understood by the church members. Whether or not the words are an exact word by word translation from Latin is unimportant. The sample translations I have read are confusing. The translation presently used works. People understand it. I do not see any reason for any changes.
Jack Kastensmidt | Lay Person | Archdiocese of Louisville | USA
 
Please listen to and consult the American laity. We are well educated thinkers.
Alice C. Brennan (Sally) | Lay Person | Chicago...16 years of Catholic School! | United States
 
The "new" language sounds way too flowery and superfluous. It is not the language of the people.
June Goers | Lay Person | Chicago | United States
 
We are the body of Christ.
Lisa Simone | Lay Person | Chicago | USA
 
I am a member of Nth./Brisbane WATAC and we have studied t his issue in depth and want to vote 'NO' to "Reforming the Reform"
Joan Nolan | Lay Person | Brisbane | AUSTRALIA
 
Why is there a push to change the language of the mass? Will it improve the mass? I enjoy the mass as is, however if they are to thinking of changing it there should be a conversation with the people of the Church since this will most certainly affect us all. Let's take a first look at this and maybe a second look as well.
David Yakimoski | Lay Person | Saskatoon | Canada
 
I see no harm in having a pilot program to test and evaluate this new roman missal. After reading many of the new translations, I think issues deserves further consideration.
Patricia A. Meyer | Lay Minister | Archdiocese of Louisville | United States of America
 
I do not see how the worship of our living God can be best done by using the literal translation of a dead language.
Joanne M. Pasko | Lay Minister | Cleveland | Ohio
 
Again, the church is forging ahead with changes which have not been approved in a collegial fashion. It was rushed through, with the Bishops having enough say in its approval. I think going back to the earlier translations of Liturgy--in an attempt to be more "faithful"--is a step backwards, and not in tune with Vatican II's sense of the people.
Ann Turner | Lay Person | Springfield Diocese | USA

What a mess!
Mark Voris | Lay Minister | Columbus, Ohio | USA
 
My concern is that the language of the new translation will lack meaning to the faithful, and will have the opposite effect than what is intended. Rather than inspire and deepen faith, it will leave us cold and empty, needful of the spirit to stir us to open ourselves to God's presence.
Deanna Spatz | Lay Person | Cincinnati | US
 
It is important that the liturgy be of the highest quality. Take look at the English Book of Common Prayer for examples of reverent language.
John O. Stack | Lay Person | Dallas | USA
  
The changes introduced following Vatican 11 regarding the celebration of the Eucharist and our Social Justice Groups and many other ways of relating to the whole of humanity with Christ's love have been so lifegiving that it is impossible to welcome the return to some of the old conservative beliefs in recent years. To rush into compulsory changes with New Missal Translations(some of which I found in my old 1940's Missal) is not a proposal that I can endorse.
Catherine Foley | Lay Person | Brisbane | Australia
 
I have been aware of these proposed changes since last year when a friend sent me the article by the Priest of Seattle USA, and I totally agree with the sentiments within that we should not implement these changes at this time.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Parramatta | Australia
 
Spare us from language we or our young children don't understand.
Kenneth P. Herrmann | Lay Person | Rochester, ny | United States
 
If we can't pray with words that we can understand, we'll tune out the words of the liturgy. Soon, no one will participate in the liturgy in the way envisioned by Vatican II. I'll look for another faith tradition that will welcome me and allow me to pray well.
Jacquelyn A Schulz | Lay Person | Milwaukee, WI | USA
   
Thank you for trying to circumvent problems with the new translations. The whole idea of the Second Vatican Council was to bring people closer to the Mass and to the Church. The new translations sound like they are going to turn people away. With all the scandals that have been going on in these past years, one would think that the Church leaders would be trying to make things easier for people to understand, rather than complicate tings. Let's leave well enough alone.
Joan Fossa | Lay Person | Miami, Florida | USA
 
Please listen to the lay men and women. The Spirit moves in our lives too.
Jim and Debbie Wayne | Lay Person | Louisville | USA
 
I have read portions of the 'new liturgy' and cannot believe that they are even being considered. The cadence of the text is very difficult and is akin to singing a song that doesn't flow at all. It's been my experience that when singing a song that doesn't flow, the congregation gets frustrated and doesn't even try to sing. I fear the same will happen with the new text and we will lose many Catholics. An old adage comes to mind; if it's not broken, don't fix it.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Columbus Ohio | USA
 
Strongly support a review of proposed liturgy by a board of recognized, qualified theologians and liturgists, and a subsequent pilot test of a wide spectrum of congregations.
Gerald M. Bitz | Lay Person | Portland (Oregon) | USA
 
Better to take more time and get it right; than rush into it.
Thomas F. Frawley | Lay Minister | Louisville | USA
 
I would like to know WHY there has to be a change in the prayers. We middle-age and seniors grew up learning prayers and have been a part of us for a very long time. What exactly is with the prayers we now have? Why bring back Gregorian chant when we have beautiful songs we now sing? Keep making these kinds of changes and you will drive Catholics to other churches. Lay people are very important to the mass when we are in short supply of priests. I feel it is a privilege to serve as Eucharistic Minister and Lector.
Anonymous | Lay Person | St Paul MN | USA
 
Thank you for giving us a chance to speak.
Patricia E. McMahon | Religious | Columbus | Ohio
 
This is another example of the heavy-handed nature of Church leadership. Why has this not been discussed in local parishes? Why are most Catholics hearing of these revisions after they have already been approved by the Pope? There should be discussion within parishes followed by discussion at the diocese level.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Toronto | Canada
 
I believe the proposed missal is a step back from full and meaningful participation in the liturgy by the laity. Please slow down the process of rolling out the new missal because it is too important to just force it on us. Liturgical prayer is the very center of our lives as Catholics. We don't want to get it wrong.
Randolph H Moore | Lay Person | Richmond | US
 
Lay people are no longer prepared to be dictated to and are more questioning and discerning. Such radical change without consultation shows a lack of respect for the people and is at odds with the Church's ethos of increased lay involvement in the liturgy. Management of change is a key process for any organization and is crucial to its development - if handled badly it can be a disaster. Key to successful change is involvement of the stakeholders and there is no evidence that the Church has even considered this. No one is against a review of the Roman Missal but the process currently in place is one of imposition not inclusivity. The only loser will be the Church as the people will vote with their feet and the enlightened priests and bishops will support them.
Moya Kelly | Lay Person | Glasgow | Scotland
 
Please deal with the "real" issues and challenges for our church at this time and don't fiddle around the edges with small matters like "wording".
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Port Pirie | Australia
 
I think this is going backwards instead of going forward!!!!
Diana | Religious | Ontario, Canada | Mississauga
 
We cannot return to the past. The Church needs to look to the future. We are the Church.
Mary McKeown | Lay Person | Toronto, Ontario | Canada
 
The new wording is the same as, or very close to, the wording in the missal I had in the 1950s. What does "And with your spirit" mean? It is hardly good English in this context and is not, in my mind, the return of a greeting. "And also with you" is more concise and clearly understood. "Vox Clara"....what a misnomer!
Fred Tomlinson | Lay Person | Toronto | Canada
 
This new translation makes changes that no average Catholic in the pews wants changed while not dealing with what should be changed, e.g. eliminating the gender-specific "men" in "for us [men] and for our salvation..." in the Credo. It should be put on hold....indefinitely...
Anne Fullerton | Lay Person | Arlington | USA
 
The new text is basically a literal translation from the Latin into English. This is not the way to go. Vatican ii saw individual Bishops' conferences producing their own own translations bearing in mind the pastoral needs of the country. The new translation totally ignores this and is trying to force all English speaking nations to use the one translation despite many many cultural differences. What a shame!
John Pungente, SJ | Priest | Toronto | Canada
 
I firmly believe the current system needs to change to include input from those of us that live what comes down the pipe. the powers that be need to have an avenue for listening to us and hearing us.
M. Celeste Fowler | Lay Person | Louisville, Kentucky | United States of America
 
Please take this request seriously.
Barbara Badanish | Lay Minister | Milwaukee | USA
 
I was received into the church 40 years ago and have been very active in parish life since then. In my present parish I have been co-ordinating and leading Children's Liturgy for 17 years and am a cantor for the psalm, as well as a member of the choir. I have also been a Foundation Governor of my local Catholic Primary School for 19 years, so I really am a 'bum on the pew'. As a linguist by training, I am appalled by the proposed new translation, which obscures rather than clarifies the meaning of the Liturgical texts. The current texts are too bland and the proposed new formal translations could have been produced by a computer with no feel for the day-to-day realities of the English language. The 1998 translations however make the prayers more immediate and give voice to our otherwise unexpressed longings and hopes as a liturgical family.
Jacqueline Blaikie | Lay Person | Lancaster | England
 
I grew up in the Latin mass and lived through the changes brought about by Vatican II. I do not understand why Rome would want to diminish the perception of participation in the mass. The changes in the wording resulting from a more literal Latin to English translation is not even well-founded linguistically. The result sounds stilted and inaccessible and reduces rather than enhances understanding. As a consequence it takes the prayerfulness of the mass away from the congregation.
Patricia Sanders | Lay Person | Canberra/Goulburn | Australia
 
This is just another example of the Catholic Church alienating the remaining people who are "hanging on by a thread". It seems to be all about control and not what it means to be human and spiritual.
Heidi Dempsey | Lay Person | Lansing | USA
  
I am concerned about the lack of consultation. I think that the new translations are literal and archaic.
Peter Herborn | Lay Person | Parramatta | Australia
 
I believe the translations and changes are a step backwards from Vatican II. The vision of Vatican II has never fully been implemented which is so very unfortunate. Would Jesus Christ really want us to spend so much time regressing? Does the church not have more pressing issues to deal with to keep us united?
Anonymous | Lay Person | Columbus Ohio | USA
 
I have been a Religious Education teacher and prepared many candidates for the RCIA over many years. The archaic expressions of the English language used in this revision of the liturgy is sure to alienate and confuse people in all walks of life. I hold a PhD and yet find the terminology obfuscating and unnecessarily verbose and pompous. Furthermore, I am aware that the process of consultation to gain the consensus of our Bishops, our representatives and leaders, has not taken place. I respectfully urge those responsible for implementing this document to pause and take time to listen to the people of the Church. I believe that in our liturgies we need simple direct language that speaks to the heart and soul of all people, young and old and is easily understood especially by those who have not had the privilege of higher education.
Marie Loller | Lay Person | Adelaide | Australia
 
I agree entirely with the above statement and sincerely hope that our concerns will be heard and acted upon.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Lancaster | England
 
I am horrified with this new translation's distorted rendering of the Latin texts. Thus the Vatican is betraying the sense of the faithful.
Kevin G. Smith | Lay Minister | Broken Bay ex Sydney | Australia
  
I find the translation wordy, convoluted and unappealing to say nothing about a step backward. Surely we can take the time to produce something that will encourage and enhance the prayer life of the laity, clerics and religious alike
Virginia Sullivan | Religious | Saint John, NB | Canada

I don't quite understand the intention of this new translation. Yes, the new translation will be more literal, but does literal prompt effectiveness? I don't believe so. For a liturgy to promote "A Deeper Meaning" to the liturgy, which the USCCB advertises on its website as the purpose of the translation, the translation must have a sense of relevancy in today's version of the English language. It is for the same reason that I do not walk around using, for instance, the words thee, thine, and thy in everyday language. In the same sense, it would seem more powerful to say "one in being with the Father" in the Nicene Creed than "consubstantiated with the Father" in the new translation of the Nicene Creed. (Ironically consubstantiated is not even in my browser's spell check dictionary.) In my 8 years as a music minister, the last three which have been spent selecting music for my masses, I have never heard a statement by any parishioners in my church nor other churches that would have indicated their dissatisfaction with the current translation. I cannot honestly believe that after almost five decades of the current translation, there are still parishioners who are dissatisfied with the Second Edition translation. As a liturgical music performer and director, I find it disheartening to see the translation's implementation into our musical mass settings; all current settings in my view have been essentially destroyed. Excluding the changes in verbal statements such as "And with your spirit," the changes to ALL mass settings will disrupt congregations for quite some time. It will take years for a composer to be able to successfully implement a widely-accepted mass setting that can blend the overly-redundant syntax of the new translation into the contemporary style of today's Church music. I vehemently oppose the new translation.
Harold Rutila | Lay Person | Lansing and Detroit | U.S.A.

The idea of making these changes at this time is beyond belief. With all that is going on in the Church currently, this should be the last thing to be considered.
Marie McGarry | Lay Person | Chicago | U.S.A.
 
I do not understand the rationale for the changes, or the rush to implement them. I agree with the statement above, try some selected parishes to test their effectiveness.
William Hamill, O.S.A. | Priest | Tulsa | USA
 
Why this new translation from the Latin?? Jesus, in case you may have forgotten, did not speak Latin. He spoke the language of his people. Vatican II gave us a church we could love and respect, a church that inspired its people. We don't need a new translation of the missal. We need a church that is spiritual and instructs its people in spirituality, not externalisms. Let us not resort to the likes of the Scribes and Pharisees and be concerned about the words and symbols of the exterior, but rather be concerned with spirituality and the Creator.
Mrs. Joan Mahon | Lay Person | Charlotte, NC | USA
 
This is not the time to be changing the words for Mass. When did Jesus say chalice?
Therese Bogenhagen | Lay Minister | Superior | USA
 
I am very concerned that I have only just learned about the controversy over this new translation. I had previously been aware that a new translation was in the process of being prepared, but knew no more about it. I am even more concerned to have been told that the priests in some UK Dioceses have been told not to talk about the new translation.
Jeanne Roberts | Lay Person | Middlesbrough | England
 
It boogles the mind to think that at a time when more and more people, especially youth, feel they do not need or are not fed by the institutional church, that those who are charged with 'shepherding' the faithful would turn backwards and grab onto an ancient language, unfamiliar metaphors, and silted syntax in order to renew a sense of mystery in the celebration of Eucharist that they say has been lost to the spirit of Vatican II. We all know how powerful language and image can be when it comes to inspiring and motivating people to action or awe-filled meditation. We need look no further that the current political landscape and rhetoric to see the evidence . How is my "roof" going to be prepared for the Lord to come under it? The word "consubstantial" slips so easily off the tongue. No doubt the 3X "mea culpa" will make me more aware of my grievous faults. Those are just a few of the obvious disconnects that the congregation will encounter while celebrating mass from the pews. When one turns to the orations used by the celebrant the incongruities of image and symbol along with the tongue twister syntax will all but sever any connection between priest and people. So if I understand the reasoning of our bishops; while youth and young adults flock to non-denominational mega churches where they feel the service and Word speaks to them in words that have meaning for their life now and many adults just stop attending Church except to mark out those important life milestones, the Catholic Church is going to return to relevance by more accurately and authentically translating the latin of the "Novus Ordo." This will return the mystery to the Mass? This will reconnect our mind, body and imagination to the ineffable? People leave the Catholic Church for other churches because there they "feel" they have some connection to the worship and they do mission, they do service. People want to experience their faith on many different levels, heart, ands, and mind. Finally in the end I believe that this will only further fracture a Church that at the moment seems to be divided into a least two, a pre and post Vatican II understanding. Those who want to remain within the Roman Catholic Church will begin traveling to parishes where the priest and worship reflect their own sensibilities. There will be a large number of parish communities that will shape their own liturgy, taking what they like and ignoring what they don't. All one has to do is so how different each parish has differing postures from the time following the priest washing his hands to the final blessing and dismissal. On any given Sunday you will finde varied gestures of standing, sitting, kneeling, raising hands, and holding hands regardless of what the rubrics say. The only people who will find new meaning in these changes are the "liturgy" police who will have new fodder and fuel to ignite their passions and send off letters to bishops, cardinals, priests, and of course like minded webstes and publication. All of them on a divine crusade to tell us what it really means to be "Catholic." We pray that the widows of the Church still haven't been shut tight and again the Spirit will find a way to open them again and renew the faithful.
Martin Singer | Lay Person | Archdiocese of Detroit | US
 
On the basis of the extracts you have provided, the 1998 translation is clearly superior. With respect to the existing translation, it has more punch, more specificity, is less woolly. Plus it has more actual content - the existing one can be a bit patchy. But what strikes one most is the clarity and elegance of the English, which it achieves without being 'arch'. The new translation meets the requirement of content and specificity, and is reasonably clear. But does not read like anything a native speaker would write. I think it will lead to a lot of puzzled faces in church.
Nicholas Hardie | Lay Person | Portsmouth | England
 
Why...
Justin Bishop | Lay Minister | Great Falls-Billings | USA
 
I am dismayed at the way a new translation is to be foisted on us. As a member of WATAC I have been informed of the action and the resistance to the change and I support grassroots action wholeheartedly
Mary Robertson | Lay Person | Broken Bay | Australia
 
This will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. There is nothing pastoral in this translation. It is all about power and control. We are in a transition time in our world and there is real concern for the direction the institutional church is heading.
Barbara Holowczak | Lay Person | Chicago, IL | USA
 
This seems a very sensible idea, but are there enough bishops courageous enough to do anything about it? Please God there are!
Mrs. Michelle Guy | Lay Person | Brisbane | Australia
 
This is evidence of the sensus fidelium, is it not?
Tracey Edstein | Lay Person | Maitland-Newcastle | Australia
 
Instead of turning inward and cultivating an elitist philosophy the church should be turning to the community in which it lives and seeking to become more accessible. If we wish to be heard on important issues we should be seen to be a contemporary, open institution.
John Gordon | Lay Person | Melbourne | Australia
 
If Benedict XVI would like to see a smaller church that matches the conservative bent of his papacy, this is a good way to start. I am a convert (1984), answering the call of God. I can't imagine these changes as bringing "leavers" back or inviting new converts if the language is so obscure.
Bev Burch | Lay Person | La Crosse | United States
 
I am very concerned that this "new" translation will discourage full and active participation, especially among our youth. So many young people are already being attracted to churches who use modern language to convey a message and vibrant christian music to inspire. I am not saying we should follow that lead, but the beautiful liturgy we currently celebrate should not so easily be set aside.
Cheryl Broussard | Lay Person | Las Vegas | USA
 
Considering all that is going on in the Church at this painful time, now, more than ever, we need to WAIT on the implementation of the new Roman Missal.
Joanne Downs | Lay Person | Kansas City - St. Joseph (Missouri) | United States
 
The proposed texts are unproclaimable and unintelligible. Please stop and rethink before you make a big mistake. What's wrong with the shelved 1998 ICEL texts, they were very worthy!
Bob Sinclair | Lay Person | Westminster | England
 
The language is cold and formal and does not convey God's abiding love for us. This is not a good time for such a change.
Bernadette Flynn | Lay Person | Elphin | Ireland
 
This is a major change that just might be at the wrong time. We are going through a severe issue with sexual misconduct that has touched even the highest ladder in the church. This just may be the straw that breaks the camels back. We do not need an uprising, lost of interest, misunderstanding that this might bring about. We should steady the ship before approaching more storms. Try it in certain areas and see how it is accepted or not. This could cause a severe split in the church, especially between the older members, newer members, and other ethnics let alone outsiders saying how we are in such turmoil.
Peter J. Manfredi | Lay Person | St. Coleman | USA
 
I was in Washington with a priest who had worked on the translation that was thrown out. When asked to interpret in this manner he refused. What they threw away without serious consideration was amazing. Those scholars worked extremely long and hard to deliver to the church a true and beautiful interpretation. I'm very scared for the spirit and soul of my church. I can only speculate as to the reasons why it was disregarded and pray that the people speak loud enough to help bring these powerful people to their collective senses.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Youngstown | USA
 
I will be 50 years ordained next year but still doing weekend ministry etc. I would like to be able to say that I am unable to believe that our bishops are pushing this this user inimical, antiquated verbiage through our ears and down our throats.....but the truth is that I am not surprised at all! They see themselves as being powerless and I fear they like it that way....not all of them , BUT A HOST OF THEM! The anti-Second Vatican Council forces are making a sick joke out of the vernacular and reducing our liturgical texts to the arcane "through their most grievous fault ."
Peter Timmins | Priest | Retired | Ontario Canada
 
While I am neither a liturgist nor a linguist, it was evident to me that many of the translated passages were not only unweildy but grammatically incorrect. I found myself getting caught up in simply trying to read the words while the meaning of the text was completely lost. While Latin is a beautiful language and is often difficult to effectively translate into English, my praying of the liturgy would be significantly hampered if the proposed changes were enacted without further consideration. It is the responsibility of ALL the People of God to make our prayer the best it can be.
M Kevin Stemmle | Lay Person | Louisville, KY | USA
 
I agree with everything that Michael Ryan has said. Many of my parishioners have English as a Second Language. I don't fancy imposing something on any of my parishioners which I cannot accept myself. English is the most beautiful of languages, full of poetry and grace. The New English Roman Missal has no poety and no grace.
Christopher Sheehy | Priest | Sydney | Australia
 
What if we just ignore it?
Theresa Buggy | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
In a review of the sample translations, I feel that in general they are wordy, clumsy, too difficult and is a discredit to the Church . I also feel that the new translations will cause division and controversy among lay people in the Catholic Church in America and sadly result in more catholics not attending Mass. I feel lay people should have more voice in how we pray and firmly agree with the market testing philosophy to wait for results prior to implementing changes. Peace and Amen! Parish Council Chair
Joan M. Echsner | Lay Person | Archdiocese of Louisville | United States of America
 
"What If We Just Said Wait" is a well thought-out essay, balancing respect for church authority with an affection for well-phrased, authentic translation.
Dixon B. Rice | Lay Person | Helena (Montana) | USA
 
I am dismayed and totally depressed by the "backward steps" being taken by this revision.
Marie Landers | Religious | Toronto | Canada
 
I think this is a worthwhile suggestion. It is not disobedient but worthy of an adult community.
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Washington, DC | United States
 
I am a pastoral liturgist, graduated from the Paul VI Institute of Liturgy, Bukidnon, and currently an incoming senior of M.A. in Liturgy in San Beda College Graduate School of Liturgy, Manila. "We are convinced that adopting translations that are highly controversial, and which leaders among our bishops as well as many highly respected liturgists and linguists consider to be seriously flawed, will be a grave mistake." I agree. And especially that a large percentage of our young people are getting bored or ignorant with the rites and prayers of our Church, the implementation of the new missal would be another way to hinder them to go to Church and appreciate our divine worship. I am with you on this movement.
Dave Ceasar Dela Cruz | Religious | Cubao | Philippines 

We just had a conference at which all of us were required to attend. A bishop from New York talked two hours justifying the changes. All of us sat there in silence. It was said that we were consulted, maybe we were, but our opinions were ignored. We are supposed to teach our congregations about something that we (I) do not understand nor agree with. Seems like again all comes down from above and not necessarily from God.
Robert J. Reidy | Priest | cleveland | usa
 
An extraordinarily reasonable request. Why would any bishop or lay person disregard it.
Tony Hiesberger | Lay Minister | Orlando, Florida, USA | USA
 
Just think of all of the paper and cost of printing new missals and sacramentaries, not to mention text books and other materials that will have to altered. How many trees will be lost? How many will go hungry or homeless with the monies used to produce this revision? WWJD?
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Springfield | USA
 
Please give us a say in how we pray. The original Latin does not necessarily make for good common use English. I find the new translation more stilted and politically correct than prayerful. Have we really asked the people in the pews?
James M. Kolb, CSP | Priest | Portland in Oregon | USA
 
I do not think that we should rush into anything. We are all so familiar with the current sacramentary that we could recite the Eucharist Prayers by heart. They are easy on the ear and make perfect sense. Why try to change them? I am afraid that this would alienate both the older Catholics who are used to them and the younger Catholics who are looking for a steady rock to worship on. I am perfectly happy with our current sacramentary, and I see no need to improve on it. I was born in 1949, so I was used to the Latin Masses. They were beautiful, but now their time has passed, and our current translation is excellent and proven by time to be very eloquent and sufficient.
Robert G. Triance | Lay Person | Pittsburgh, PA | U.S.A.
 
After 30 years as a "lapsed" Catholic I came back to the sacraments 5 years ago because I perceived that the seeds of Vatican II had actually taken root and born fruit in the Church and I was at last again proud to call her my mother. I would hate to be let down now by regression and retrenchment of a closed and out-of-touch hierarchy.
Elizabeth Malone | Lay Person | Philadelphia | USA
 
I believe it is the responsibility of all Catholics to share ideas with our leadership in a respectful way. Some would say that loyalty means, "Mine is not to question why, mine is but to do or die", but I disagree. The sign of loyalty in a community is to share perspectives in a loving and humble way. I sign this petition because it seems like a reasonable idea on how to implement the new missle. I also sign it because I believe it is my responsibility to the Church leadership to point this possible approach out for its consideration. Once considered I will with the best of my skill and training assist the people entrusted to my care to become masters at the new wording promulgated. Respectfully, Fr. Jeff Nicolas
Jeff Nicolas | Priest | Louisville | USA
 
Golly, the new translations sound like middle-school poetry -- the badly-written kind! While I'm sure the words are perfect translations, there's something lost when these words are spoken aloud: much of what I've read will surely befuddle and confound the vast and overwhelming majority of nonplussed congregants. Or should I have said "it will confuse a lot of the parishioners"?
James O'Connell | Lay Minister | Santa Clara | United States
 
As a Latin teacher, I frequently ask my students to give me two translations, one that is literal and the other which uses accurate but idiomatic English. I do that to challenge their understanding of Latin constructions, but I want an English equivalent from them to help them grapple with proper English and its own peculiar properties. I fail to grasp how literal translations of any language can be helpful for worship. We pray in English in our country, and I have a profound respect for Latin, but I feel strongly that our prayers should be Englished by the American church which understands the language, not by a Vatican commission which evidently doesn't. I am also quite disturbed at the apparent disregard by the Vatican offices handling this matter for their usurpation of the local Bishops' authority, acknowledged to have that same authority by the second Vatican Council.
Servando Mendez | Lay Person | Archdiocese of New Orleans | United States
 
I confess to conflicting emotions about the new translations that have now received the Vatican's "recognitio." On the one hand, it has long been obvious that there are defects in the translations we have been using for the past forty years, especially in texts like the Gloria and the Nicene Creed. But the new versions seem to lose in accessibility what they may gain in accuracy.
John W. Mahon | Deacon | Bridgeport | USA
 
We have 2 mentally challenged boys who practically know the Mass by heart. They love the Mass and are proud that they can understand and say it. Everyone has told me that they are blessed and amazed of how well they can pray and give the correct response during Mass. The boys even find it hard to keep quiet because they even know some parts of the Mass that the priest is supposed to say alone . Sometimes the people sitting around them will hear our boys recite out loud, "Through Him, With Him and In Him, In the Unity of the Holy Spirit, all power and glory are Yours, Almighty Father, Now and Forever," and they continue with the loud resound of AMEN (A truly GREAT AMEN!) Right now they are one of the few that actually pull out their hymnal and sing. If the Mass is changed, I'm afraid that they would be devastated. as they don't adjust to well with change. I guess that there will be a lot of wrong responses if the Mass changes. They have been going since they were young and they are now 21 and 22. Please don't change the Mass. Keep it simple for us all to understand and pray. Save the Innocence of simple sheep. God be with us!
Mr. and Mrs. Carl Schlicht | Lay Person | Erie | USA
 
Many troubling changes, particularly because we do know the power of language and therefore the responsibility we bear in communicating faithfully and effectively the mercy of God in Christ. My greatest distress however comes from the change in the priests part during the consecration that is now to become...TAKE THIS, ALL OF YOU, AND DRINK FROM IT: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, THE BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL COVENANT; WHICH WILL BE POURED OUT FOR YOU AND FOR MANY FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS. DO THIS IN MEMORY OF ME. For many??? - Is the Church actually changing the deepest understanding we have proclaimed throughout history of Christ Himself and the meaning of His sacrifice "once for all"? And yes, I know that "many" is used in the gospels, but I have been taught to understand that in our Catholic theology in light of the whole of scripture and the Tradition of the church as distinguishing between the “objective redemption” of all by Christ, and the “subjective redemption” of those who will accept Christ"s salvation (CCC II:603) while always proclaiming the Salvific Act of God in Christ for ALL.! How will this change be understood, by our people and by the whole people of God? This is the crushing blow that no one seems to be addressing and cuts to the core of what it means to be catholic, and to bear witness to Christ in the world! This is the heartbreaker; not borne of a resistance to change but rather a profoundly felt resistence to diminish by our own choice of words the very mission of Christ. Words are powerful! So we are compelled to speak out as St. Paul said; Since, then, we have the same spirit of faith, according to what is written, "I believed, therefore I spoke," we too believe and therefore speak. (2 cor. 4) Please take the time to carefully and faithfully express in our liturgy, in our language, the good news that is Christ for the life of the world. Lead us toward the greatest change; the ever deepening conversion that turns us more fully to Christ, and through Christ, to the whole world.
dorothy hulburt | Lay Minister | san diego | usa
 
Having compared parts of the new English translation to the version we currently use, I am aghast that we are to have a stiff, clumsy, polysyllabic form of translation--sometimes not even standard English!--foisted upon us as our new way to pray. No native speaker of English would choose to express himself or herself to anyone, especially God, in such awkward phraseology. The new translation will prove a barrier to my prayer, not an aid. If the goal of the new translation is to distance us from God when we pray, it will succeed mightily. And do we really want to encourage people to return to saying their rosaries during the time the presidng priest is "doing his thing" at Mass? If I, who am more than 70 years old, have this response to the new translation, I can only guess at the responses of young people who have been born into the Catholic faith. I do not think that the Catholic Church can hope to keep youth active in the Church if the language we give them for prayer seems contrived, alien, artificial--even soulless. Jesus used the language of the people as he taught them. He couched his teaching in light of what THEY would understand. I believe that we should try to do the same. The new translation fails to do so.
Angeline Dufner | Lay Person | St. Cloud | USA
 
Stand, kneel. You cannot preach in our church unless you are a Roman Catholic priest; no women, no Episcopalians etc. Stand, kneel. We are going to get rid of any vestige of Vatican II. Stand kneel. The laity can't pour the wine in the cups. Stand, kneel. We can't control the media about our scandals but we can try to control English speaking Roman Catholics. Stand, kneel. You must respect us no matter what. Kneel. It's not about the body of Christ and faith; its about form and us. Kneel and keep kneeling.
E. J. Gary | Lay Person | Louisville | USA
 
I pray that the Bishops, Cardinals and the Pope listen to the lay people and priests who are vehemently against this giant step BACKWARD for the Church. We need to take small, medium and large steps FORWARD. Thank you.
Marcella Costa | Lay Person | Monterey | USA
 
I am a 28 year old "cradle Catholic". I grew up with the current translation and at times, even today, I had trouble with some of the language. I cannot imagine what will happen when my children, smart as they might be, grow up and want to become part of a church where the words give them no CLUE as to what is going on. I don't mean to say that it needs to "easier" but (in my opinion) the new translation will make it harder to express what we feel as Catholics. We, as a church are having a hard time keeping people involved with our parishes with the way things are now. What will happen when this goes into action?
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Venice, Florida | United States
 
Why does Latin have to be so divinised? I actually love the language, but not rendered in this clumsy manner!
Maree Byron | Religious | Brisbane | Australia
 
Please do not ask us to move back in time! We are trying to keep our children and grandchildren in the Faith, and we are having some success. I am personally attending one of my grandchildren's Confirmation, two of my grandchildrens' First Communions, a college graduation and a wedding in the month of May --- thanks be to God, they are participating in the Faith! But, if we continue on the path that this leadership lays, we will lose a lot of these precious young people. Keep opening up the Church to our youth, and we will "renew the face of the Earth", as our God has asked us to do.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Cleveland | USA
 
Let's take time to rebuild confidence in the Church and her leadership before instituting changes in text and rubrics of the Liturgy. There is plenty of time to switch from "And also with you" to "And with your spirit." The flock is scattered and hurt, and we as Church leaders need to gather it back.
Fred Ritchie | Deacon | Brooklyn | USA
 
I am a university professor of theology, and I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. Shalom,
J. Milburn Thompson, Ph.D. | Lay Person | Louisville, KY | USA
 
I pray that we follow what GOD wants us to do in this matter!
Timoteo Saldana Honesto | Lay Person | Toledo | USA
 
I am a liturgical musician and very disenchanted with the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. I know how hard people have worked on this, but there are bigger problems right now and if they aren't addressed, there won't be anyone in the pews to learn the new format...
Anonymous | Lay Minister | CHicago | United States
 
The Church has undergone many changes in the past 50 or so years - many more changes than in the last 1000 or so before. These past changes have been well-done and needed. This is not needed. In fact, it's probably going to be detrimental. There are other problems that our church needs to focus on besides confusing those in liturgy
Caitlin Grothaus | Lay Person | Archidiocese of Louisville | United States
 
I am a Jesuit missionary in Zambia, though originally from Seattle Washington. I was ordained in St. James Cathedral, Seattle, by Archbishop Thomas A. Connolly on 20 June 1970. I have been working in Zambia since 1964 (as a Jesuit scholastic and later as a priest) including a 3-year period of service in Kinshasa, D. R. Congo. My experience tells me that in a country like Zambia, English needs to be rather simple in its vocabulary and syntax and quite straightforward in usage. This is a developing country and for most people English is a 2nd or 3rd language.The local African languages are very widely spoken in informal and familiar settings. Yet it is the offical language of the country, for business, education, government service and tourism.
peter russell titland | Priest | Lusaka | Zambia
 
Since reading of the new Roman Missal I have been both enraged and terrified. I see the return to the literal translation from Latin of the liturgy as another step in the dismantling of Vatican II. Those who are currently in power in the Vatican will not stop until the laity are once again removed from active participation in the Church, our Church. Also when the people asked Jesus to teach them to pray he did not speak in Latin he taught them the Our Father in their own language. It is time that those in power in the Church paid closer attention to what Jesus said and did. Then they might have a greater understanding of the real needs of the Church in these very difficult times.
Geraldine Fitzpatrick | Lay Person | Cloyne | Ireland
 
the Spirit speaks to the non-ordained equally clearly
H Richard Bowles | Lay Minister | Louisville | USA
 
Please, please go slowly with this. Have a highly organized pilot program so that our dear Catholicism doesn't have yet another major upset on its hands.
Rita M. King | Lay Person | Monterey Diocese | United States of America
 
No translation without representation!
Anonymous | Lay Minister | Rockville Centre, NY | USA
 
There has been no consultation with the people -- especially with women who now make up 66% of Mass attendees.  The new translation is too literal a translation from Latin to English and some of the words are too obscure.
Denise Laverty | Religious | Lismore | Australia
 
How will changing the prayers of the Mass into language which is more clumsy and less comprehensible help us to pray? What is the purpose of these changes? Can anyone give me a positive slant on them?
Cecilia Bailey | Lay Person | Cardiff | UK
 
When I studied Latin in the minor seminary we were told to translate ideas, not words. This does not seem to be the case in the translations I have read.
Walt Adamczyk | Lay Person | Louisville | USA
 
Yet another retrograde maneuver by the conservative hierarchy, which can only serve to destabilise a church which has already been shaken to it's very foundations by the revelation of these scandals which the "Holy Father"(s) have been hiding under their robes for all these years.
Joseph O' Hara | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
Please do not add more confusion to the disheartened members of our community by attempting to change our words of prayer. Despite many obstacles that we deal with in trusting our church these days, being able to pray with words that express our feelings is comforting. I agree with so many who have written regarding other ways to rekindle the Spirit in our people. There is an underlying hurt and lack of trust now running through the Catholic community. This needs to be addressed openly and often by our priests who are called by Jesus to offer healing to His people. And please, speak to us in simple language we understand!
Anonymous | Lay Person | Louisville | USA
 
The language of the new translations is by turn flowery and inelegant. In places the sentences are badly constructed making them more difficult to understand than the ones currently in use. If change is deemed to be necessary, imposing upon us change for the worse is a very unwelcome imposition.
Mary Baxter | Lay Person | Liverpool | UK
 
Bishops Trautman's 2009 Fred McManus series lecture (accessible on the web at http://www.eriercd.org/pdf/mcmanus.pdf ), in memory of a renowned and beloved liturgist, leaves little additional to be said about the drawbacks of the proposed English translation of the third typical edition of the Roman Missal. In eloquent fashion he provides background for why the statement of concern, 'What if we just said wait', is so critical. The new translation is overly literal; suffers discontinuity from the pastoral and decentralizing intent of Sacrosanctum Concilium, a document on liturgy of an ecumenical council; and brings back ancient mindsets and ways of speaking foreign to the receptor English language that will no doubt impede the prayer of the People of God. The many comments posted on this website, and more than 20,000 signatures to date, attest to the fact that the return to these mindsets and manner of prayer will cause much pain for these signers, not to mention the people they serve. The new translations themselves significantly depart, especially in mindset, from the current ones in use now for roughly 35 years. Given the significance of this departure, the statement of concern makes good common sense. With remote preparation for the introduction of the new texts now underway, 'What if we just said wait' could make a helpful contribution. Yet, even if it is not taken into account, it should continue as a place to turn to register concern and document groundswell for evaluation as problems emerge in real time. In addition, it will continue to give signers a sense of togetherness in anticipation of the swing of the pendulum of history once again forward toward aggiornamento, the true intent of Vatican II. In this context the signers of this statement of concern stand together--and wait!
Charles C. McDonald | Lay Person | Arlington | USA
 
Maybe the church should look at its own linguistics before changing the Missal. e.g. A punishment is not a promotion as was done to Cardinal Bernard "above the" Law. Maybe it should clean house first. Clean up the scandals then work on the missals.
Carol Pehrson | Lay Person | Des Moines? | USA
 
Why does the Vatican seek to further alienate the people of God by moving us away from a warm and loving conversation with our God? Stiff, formal and badly translated words do not encourage us in our worship of God at Mass and will certainly empty our churches of those, young and old, who are finding their Catholic faith severely tested at the moment with all the reports of clerical child sexual abuse and the indifference of some of the hierarchy to the voices of the survivors.
Claire Breheny | Lay Person | Kildare and Leighlin | Ireland
 
I am 63 years old. I do remember pre-Vatican II and I remember my Croatian grandmother swearing in Croat about the mass changes. She went to church and continued to sing in the choir, but she sang the old words and prayed the old prayers. I put that to stubbornness, but now realize she was too set in her ways and too old to learn the new words. As she got older, she reverted more and more to Croat. I think that I too, will never learn the new words, not because I am as stubborn but because it is not worth my time. If I truly believe I walk with Jesus, then he knows what I believe and what it is I say and I don't think he cares what the language is. I am, however, a lector and have been for 30 years. I will put my energy into preparing to share the word of God and my prayer as I approach the ambo will now include "let me and the new translation NOT get in the way of your people hearing you. I see nothing wrong with waiting a year - why is the hierarchy so anxious to cram this down our throats? For me as a thinking and educated Catholic woman, this is just one more thing I am being told to accept w/o the benefit of having anything to say about it.
Pam Wilson | Lay Person | Portland in Oregon | USA
 
I am not in favour of this new translation. It completely subverts the work of the International Committee on English in the Liturgy, which Committee completed a new translation of the Roman Missal in the early 1990s. It was approved by the Australian Catholic Bishops in 1994 and should have received recognition by the Vatican at that time.
Liz Morris | Religious | Adelaide | Australia
 
To Whom It May Concern, From the examples I have seen, and from the current daily Scripture readings, it is obvious that the new liturgical prayers are far from the high quality English translations we expect. Since there is no real urgency to introduce new translations, a slow, methodical , pilot program seems a reasonable request. We don't need to create more tension in the Church.
Guy F. Roddy, FIC | Religious | Youngstown | USA
 
The stilted language is neither pleasing to the ear nor prayerful. It may or may not be true to an ancient text but the examples cited are sufficient to demonstrate that no English-speaking person with a modicum of experience with English grammar approved them. Let us pray that the Spirit will intervene and the introduction of these texts will not occur.
Joseph P. Flynn Jr. | Lay Person | Pittsburgh | USA
 
The new translation is not a valid use of the English language as we speak it. We need to bring people to Christ using the language that will help them draw near and listen. Why must we make it difficult to approach our good God in a language which is not our own in meaning and cadence? Why is a more exact translation of a dead language seen as a good? We are talking about people at prayer. If there is no heresy involved in the words we use in our sacramental prayer, please leave it alone. Let us pray....
Anonymous | Religious | Philadelphia | USA
 
Let's take our time. I am tired of changes being made so abruptly.
Dan Casciano | Lay Person | Rochester, NY | USA
 
I am most concerned about this new Roman Missal in English Having read Rev. Michael Ryan's article in Tui Motu, I totally agree with what he says and think it is important not to have this 'new' translation imposed upon us without any consultation.
Helen Doherty | Lay Person | Auckland | new Zealand
 
More proof that Rome has lost touch with grass-roots Catholics.
John en | Lay Person | Brisbane | Australia
 
As a lay person I have read as much as I can on this subject. I have also carefully read the welcome "Pastoral Letter of the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI to the Catholics of Ireland" concerning sexual abuse, which His Holiness sent last week. I have no idea how a member of the laity can send a letter of reply to His Holiness. However, in the sense that he has written (as I understand it) a personal letter to me, I feel he will accept this note in the reciprocal sense as I address him on the subject of changes to the Mass that I attend in these difficult times. He, and my respected Archbishop, rightly informs me that "No one imagines that this painful situation will be resolved quickly.  Real progress has been made, yet much more remains to be done". While fully accepting these words of wisdom, guidance and encouragement, may I humbly ask that while we, the Church, are endeavoring to deal with the "painful situation" (which is taking up quite a substantial portion of religious reflection at the present time), the matter of changes to the Mass might perhaps be placed in a more understanding perspective by the Vatican, thereby allowing us to fully embrace, in the first instance, the Fourteen Points addressed to us by the Holy Father in his Letter. Accordingly, please, defer all further consideration of changes to the Mass - because, in the vernacular, I have quite enough on my plate at the moment while "much more remains to be done" before changing what I am desperately clinging to at present - The Mass . Thank you.
Kieran McGovern | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
How much more can an American Catholic Lay Woman take? The list is exhausting.. * the outrage of the hierarchical cover ups of Sexual Abuse by priests of the youth of our church * the USCCB allowing itself to be manipulated into opposing the recent health care bill * abortion continuing to be addressed politically by the hierarchy instead of as a moral wrong chosen by an individual who may be desperate/weak/poor * the Vatican investigating our dear Sisters who have devoted their lives to educating and nursing us * now a ridiculous move to change our prayer language. Please Holy Spirit, hear our prayer!
Rita Rings | Lay Person | Cincinnati | USA
 
Sometimes it seems quite difficult for the hierarchy to recognize and respect the fact that WE are the church! Let's claim our baptismal roles as priest, prophet and king. Let us pray we can find hope and strength as we work toward reconciliation and peace with courage and faith. In this holiest of weeks we focus on service, suffering, redemption and resurrection. Jesus: betrayed, abandoned and denied...then AND now? Let us worship in words we can all understand, words that are accessible while respectful, inviting while scriptural, grammatical while inspiring. May the Risen Christ reign in our hearts and minds and spirits!
Patricia McConville | Lay Minister | Boston MA | USA
 
I think this topic being discussed at this time will be seen as a way to distract attention from the burning issues facing the Catholic Church.
Anonymous | Religious | Killala | Ireland
 
What a wonderful thing. So many people showing their deep care for the liturgy. This is something that should get respect and notice. English is a holy language. So is Spanish and Russian and Chinese and . . . Imagine, the language of Shakespeare and Mark Twain and Abraham Lincoln and Emily Dickinson and so many other great communicators, being considered, not quite holy enough when used properly. Not quite holy enough, so that a more literal translation from Latin is deemed required. Let us work harder. Let us pray with greater hope that God will help us find the way to the best liturgical language we can develop. Until then, let's wait on the text being promoted. It's not the best we can do for such a great use.
Dan Illich | Lay Person | Seattle | USA
 
As Chairman of our Pastoral Council, I am deeply concerned at the number of Parishioners who simply do not accept the new version. This move is not conducive to promoting our Church and more importantly bringing back the youth.
John pearse | Lay Minister | Rosebank Catholic Church | South Africa
 
I see no indication that most of the changes will clarify or add anything to the Mass we currently have. The change that concerns me greatly is the one at the Elevation that says Christ's blood was spilled "for most," rather than the current version that stipulates it was "for all." Just who do they want us to leave out?
Mary Rae Bragg | Lay Person | Dubuque Archdiocese, Dubuque, Iowa | United States
 
The samples here, especially the Nicene Creed and longer extracts from Eucharistic prayers, reek of the verbose transliterations that we used to find in the English column of Latin-English missals when I was a boy. This is not modern English style or usage. I make this observation as a writer myself, of a few small books and some 500 articles in publications ranging from America and JIVAN magazines to a wide range of periodicals here in Zimbabwe: I also served 20 years on the editorial board of 'Social Change' magazine, Harare. This is not a language to engage our minds and hearts. Hearing that there are similar disputes about a new Japanese translation of the liturgical texts, I suspect these could be attempts to foist bad English, bad Japanese, bad German etc on us until we accept bad Latin as the lesser evil, because it is less clear.
Brian MacGarry | Religious | Harare | Zimbabwe
 
As a social scientist retired from the public mental health system, I think all professionals need to spend more time listening to the people they serve.
Jack Rakosky | Lay Person | Cleveland | USA
 
It is imperative that any translation be in keeping with the spirit of Scripture and ceremony as it has been handed down for generations. This inevitably involves use of language which has meaning within the culture of the times. There are enough questions within this proposal that can be better addressed by a cautious introduction and trials. Slow down, wait! What's to be gained by rushing except to alienate.
Don Kretschmann | Lay Minister | Pittsburgh | USA
 
Time and money and human energy could be better spent on feeding, clothing, educating, and providing health care for the world's hungry than on changing the wording of the liturgy. It is not how we pray but that we pray.
Anonymous | Lay Person | New York | USA
 
The translations are unnecessary and divisive in a time when unity is crucial.
Alan Boland | Lay Person | Port Elizabeth | South Africa
 
I believe in change, but this is one change I am not for. The current language is beautiful and warm. Leave it alone!
Lynn Drum | Lay Person | Detroit | USA
 
We have been trying the new text for a year, and it is confusing, less meaningful and quite disruptive. My husband has stopped attending mass (for other reasons as well, to be honest, but the new text is an important one of them). I converted after Vatican II because the Catholic faith and its liturgy made sense to me. The recent developments are most disturbing. Are there not more important things to attend to in our church and in the world than these attempts at turning the clock back?
Ingrid de Bont | Lay Person | Pretoria | South Africa
 
I am a convert about 7 years ago. One of the things that I noticed right away is that it is tough to keep the young people involved. My wife and I have the mission to attend mass in all the churches in the diocese of Erie. We have been at it for about 6 or so years. The first thing that we have noticed upon entering a new church is the amount of energy. We are able to tell if the church is alive and well or it is almost dead. Guess what? It is directly related to the numbers of young people involved. These changes will not help this and may cause the further decline of the energy found in our churches. By the way my wife Marge and I have about 5 more churches to go.
ken worley | Lay Minister | Erie | USA
 
I support the waiting and experimenting process in order to get the sense of the faithful. Since liturgy is the work of the people rather than just liturgical elites, we need to listen how the Holy Spirit works through the people in response to the revised liturgy. As an immigrant, who is not an English native speaker, I can see the equalizing factor of the new liturgy, namely inscrutability for both English native and non-native speaking priests. However, inscrutability does not guarantee our experience of the divine. Neither does total clarity. Let us then give some time for testing and experiment with the new liturgy before its full implementation.
Ignatius H. Sasmita, S.J. | Priest | Oakland | USA
 
Thank you for providing an opportunity to voice objections to the new translations in a positive, constructive way.
Charles L. Brown III | Priest | Wilmington | USA
 
I am mystified as to why the one of the translation goals was to render the English to be more true to the Latin. This results in awkward phrasing often LESS imbued with the desired meaning. I am still trying to understand changing the Nicene Creed from WE believe to I believe. Are we not a most essentially, at our core, a community of believers?
Margaret Fortier | Lay Person | Newark | USA
 
This translation, from what I have read of it, is obscure, awkward, esoteric, and lacking in pastoral authenticity. While waiting might be a delaying tactic, what really needs to happen is that the translation is scrapped.
(Sister) Elizabeth Bickar | Religious | Brooklyn | USA
 
Here in Ireland many of us Catholics are reeling from the reports on child abuse perpetrated by our priests and concealed by our Bishops. I must admit that changes in the Roman Missal have not been on our radar. Thank you for making us aware once more that Rome has lost touch with the People of God.
Betty Gleeson | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
We do not need any more male specific translations of liturgy. Texts such as 'for us men and for our salvation....' . Which is more important, a literal translation of the Latin, or a translation that no longer excludes more than 50% of the worshipping community.
Teresa Mee | Religious | Dublin | Ireland
 
I support the courageous priests who have voiced their concern about this Restoration by the hierarchy. I am old enough to remember the joyless silence of pre-Vatican II liturgy. It appears to be the goal of the authorities to bring it back. I see no reason for hope that this appalling decision can be reversed, unfortunately.
Ray MacDonald | Lay Person | Ottawa | Canada
 
I have written to our local Catholic newspaper, the Southern Cross, to voice my unhappiness with the new translations - their awkwardness in direct translation of the Latin, their hints of dualism, and the fact that they did not take the opportunity to introduce gender-inclusive language, among other complaints. I would strongly suggest a WAIT vote
Elinor Lowry | Lay Person | Johannesburg | South Africa
 
At the bottom of the pyramid, supporting with my money the "Servus servorum and the whole court", I can only say at this point that I am so disappointed with the hierarchy that I am ready to join my children outside of the Institution. As a lay person I used the GI bill to study theology in Italy because there was nothing for the laity in the early 70's in Miami. I left. I studied in Torino and when I came back I was lucky to work for the Archdiocese for 24.5 years, in the times of Archbishop Edward McCarthy. What a beautiful application of Vatican II then! Now...I am struggling with the return of the clericalism, with the climbing of the clergy looking for colors and titles to wear and the emptiness of the Eucharistic celebrations in Latin and the ornaments of the 50s...I feel that I am now "beyond religion"...
George Briz | Lay Person | Miami | USA
 
I am deeply appreciative of the actions now being taken to challenge the merits of undoing the work of Vatican II in the arena of liturgy. I have recently become aware of the polarizing distinctions now being promulgated by some in the Church: the "hermeneutic of discontinuity" vs. the "hermeneutic of continuity". It appears that the re-latinization of liturgical language is a strong expression of those who advocate a hermeneutic of continuity. As one who grew up in (and was nurtured by) the post-Tridentine church, I have had a profound experience in my lifetime of the need for both continuity and discontinuity in the Church. It is a strategic denial of the humanness of the Church to pretend that change and development are not inherently necessary to vitality and life. One way to view continuity is to assert the need to recover core aspects of Christianity that pre-date the development of the institutional church and its immersion in the political arena beginning in the 4th century. God forbid that we permit the Church to fall into the mimicry of our current political and societal polarization. If the body of Christ cannot avoid the profound disrespect of those whose opinions differ that is so widespread in the world today, then I say that the Church has failed in a fundamental way. I am hopeful that persons of good will can catch themselves before going over the cliff into irreversible opposing camps. In the meantime, let us assert our concerns openly and passionately. Perhaps one way to bridge the gap is to provide a greater variety of liturgical choices, without making anyone wrong who disapproves of the alternatives.
Jim McDonald | Lay Person | Los Angeles | USA
 
It is clear to me that 1) the undermining of the work of the old ICEL was/is a power play and has nothing to do with faith or religion; 2) The way the translations are being done here is very counterproductive to intelligent participation in the liturgy (especially by the youth)and also to understanding the real meaning in the liturgy/sacraments. However, I believe that one should not spend. too much time or energy bemoaning the translation as such because this can only distract the church from the very real problems it faces in the building of community and in serving the world -- in a way it is a red herring
Peter Brislin | Lay Person | Bloemfontein | South Africa
 
To borrow from another arena, I don't think there's enough lipstick for this pig.
Theodore J. Miller | Priest | Toledo | USA
 
The new translation should be shelved, and the translation done in the nineties should be resurrected. In the meantime we should continue to use the present translation.
Joseph A. Keough | Religious | Baltimore | USA
 
The Vatican Council was a great step forward in the Roman Catholic Church. The translation of the Missal following it was also wonderful advance in the liturgy of the church. The proposed translation is a major step backward. I notice that many of the sentences are in the passive voice which weakens the language and many sentences use poor or incorrect English. Please at least give us the opportunity to review and comment on these translations.
Donald F. McGuigan, DDS | Lay Minister | Philadelphia | USA
 
My wife and I have the deepest foreboding concerning the imposition of the new translation. Precious or archaic language which is intended (so we understand) to re-introduce a sense of 'mystery' into the celebration of Mass will only further alienate the many Catholics who are just about 'hanging in there.' And it will do nothing for our children and grandchildren. The Mass is indeed a great mystery, but the language with which we choose to celebrate it should be language we can lend our hearts and minds to with full joy and vigour. The proposed changes simply do not reflect our desire to celebrate the liturgy in this way.
John Vaughan-Neil | Lay Minister | Southwark | UK
 
I am an augustinian friar living in the archdiocese of philadelphia and I travel each weekend throughout the united states preaching on behalf of "food for the poor"... I experience parish life in so many dioceses.... and I also experience the effect of the "pastoral" leadership of pastor and bishops wherever I go with regard to the liturgical celebration of the Eucharist... after 40 years of the second Vatican council I can honestly say that the pastoral education of the laity that should have taken hold in the life of these parishes has remained as divided today if not more so than it did 35 years ago because the die hards have gotten stronger in their obstinacy and the spirit of Vatican II has failed to melt the frozen and warm the chilled... a change of language will do nothing to advance anything but solidify the arrogance of those who never understood the movement of the Spirit that pope john XXIII allowed to flow through the church... these so called changes for the better are nothing more than cosmetic surgery to a liturgy that still does not speak to the 21st century Christian catholic... this much to do about nothing will not attract converts from those who have walked away from among us nor will it gain the attention of those curious to look at us another time... why have we wasted all this time and money and energy on "egotistical" improvements and not really learned to communicate within and without... and the scandals abound and no one speaks honestly and the media tears us to shreds and we bury on heads in the ground and they mock us to the point of ridicule... and we pretend it is a persecution and fail to repent for our crimes against the Body of Christ still unhealed and unforgiven... and those guilty get called to Rome for high office appointments... or the hierarchy refuses to step down and repent in solitude for the rest of their lives... they have shamed the Body of Christ and the pope wears Gucci slippers... what a mockery of the humble Jesus...
ralph john monteiro, o.s.a | Priest | Philadelphia | USA
 
If the English does not conform to the Latin change the Latin. English is the new Vulgate.
James Rueth | Lay Minister | Northampton | UK
 
When I first heard of these changes I went to the Archdiocese website to read them for myself to see if they really were as bad a people were saying, they are! Please listen to your people and wait on these changes. Better yet, don't make the changes at all.
Sheila Kelly | Lay Person | St. Paul and Minneapolis | USA
 
Liturgiam Authenticam should be scrapped. We should return to the principles of Paul VI. Latin is a dead language. Let it rest in peace.
Jeremy Tobin | Priest | Canon Regular of Premontre | USA
 
I am amazed that, in BOTH translations, we still say, in the Creed, "for us men" as opposed to "for all of us".
Carolyn Fay | Lay Person | Indianapolis | USA
 
'the church has grown a year every century...it's time now for the people to mature and take their place alongside the 'clerical' church. Jesus wants to find faith...not religion.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Leeds | UK
 
May God help us... I was taught many years ago in the seminary by some very wonderful Benedictine monks that the people are generally 50 years ahead of the clergy when it comes to recognizing the work of the Spirit....how true... But I will most likely not be here in another 50 years to see the result of His work today...I hope the folks in Rome get it sooner than that!!!!
Don Petersik | Lay Person | Seattle | USA
 
I look forward to a time when the English we use is truly inclusive and reflects the acknowledgment that half the human race is female and that women are the backbone of the community that claims Jesus as the source of its inspiration and life.
Philip Baxter | Religious | Lusaka | Zambia
 
As a student at Seattle University (1962-66), I remember resentfully sitting through the medieval pageantry of Mass in the half-empty Cathedral (was that lovely Gregorian chant a choir or a recording? We never found out...). We students, who were there because Archbishop Connolly declared that Mass on campus did not meet the Sunday obligation, generally found this celebration (and the homilies!) to be completely out of step with the wonderful breeze blowing through the "open windows" on campus. I am so pleased to hear that 45 years on St. James Cathedral is helping us to find the courage and the wisdom to stand up for ourselves and our children. Liturgy matters. Many of us are not going to go backwards.
Mary Kay Schoen | Lay Person | Arlington | USA
 
I believe that limiting the use of the New Translation to a diocese or two OR to several delineated American parishes and analyzing the reactions would allow for a reasonable catechesis of Catholics throughout our Country PRIOR to adopting the New Translation. If reactions to the NEW... are so-o-o negative that it seems adoption of it could cause a disruption to the daily life of the Church, then I think the adoption should be postponed until such time as additions/deletions/changes can be made and it be re-introduced...
Sr. Carol Tenerovich | Religious | Pittsburgh | USA
 
I think this issue needs more attention. Testing is needed, this sentences are not going to be understood, especially by the elderly, who make up 90% of our Church. My 85 year old mother would be lost!
Nancy Beck | Lay Person | Phoenix | USA
 
We have had the new version for a long time and it still grates! The changes in the sixties felt so right. The liturgy came alive. These are imposing the dead hand of a dead language on our living liturgy. The warmth of loving prayer is replaced by the chill of "accurate translation" - and horrible English! In South Africa, we have many people from different cultural and language backgrounds, who, of necessity, worship in English. Why bemuse them, as well as anger the rest of us with ugly, complicated, unnatural words? This is Rome at its worst. Will they never learn?
Elizabeth Coutts-Trotter | Lay Person | Johannesburg | South Africa
 
I am an EPISCOPAL bishop. I commend you for your initiative. The Episcopal Church had 6 to 8 years of parish 'trial use' with responses before the final revision to our liturgy was made in 1976-1979. We too had linguistic experts but they are not perfect. It's a good way to proceed. +HWS
Harry W Shipps | Bishop | Georgia (Episcopal) | USA
 
I tend to be rather traditional in liturgical matters, and I believe in following the rubrics, directives and instructions of the larger church. When I saw the Ordo, I was deeply concerned about the tortured English found there. But I thought that perhaps with force of repetition I would grow used to it. However, as the collects and other parts of the new translations begin to leak out, I cannot keep silent. The broken syntax, Latinate grammar and vocabulary will encourage, rather than discourage the paraphrasing, rewording and personal interpretation that this "new missal" is supposed to discourage. Priests will change this mass at will. I know I will. And some will never introduce it. This missal will only damage further the prayer life of parish communities. We have to wait. OR at very least Rome has to submit these translations to us on a provisional basis; allow us to use them for a time and then make revisions based on the common sense of the worshiping communities.
Donald Baker | Priest | New York | USA
 
I am a Director of Music at a parish of 3,800 + families in CA. I have a Master of Divinity and a Master of Arts (Music--Performance, Composition)and have worked for years both in pastoral and music responsibilities within the church. For anyone who has studied languages, it is clear that attempting to attain a closely word-for-word translation will do damage not only to the translation but to the thought and intent of the original text but to the idea behind the original text. How can one English translation possibly be effective for the entire English-speaking portion of the Catholic Church? It is quite obvious that the United States, Canada, India, Australia, and other English-speaking countries do NOT use English in the same manner! If Rome is concerned about other language groups using the English translation along-side the Latin to work out their particular translation, then tell those making translations to work specifically from the Latin and NOT use the English. Trying to make the English translation a word-for-word translation will hardly solve the problem and will only create more.
Lyle D. Peters | Lay Minister | Fresno | USA
 
The South African bishops really jumped the gun and instituted the new responses last year. There was a robust correspondence in our SA Catholic paper, the Southern Cross, with a significant outcry and much criticism, completely ignored by the bishops. it is amazing that, in this day and age, when even children in schools are taught inclusive language, that women are so obviously excluded. What a pity more attention was not paid to the original Aramaic, the language of Jesus, rather than to Greek and Latin.
Etheen Lowry | Lay Person | Johannesburg | South Africa
 
Whether the reports of shenanigans behind the new translation are true or not, the new translation is not an improvement.
James Hurley McCarthy | Lay Person | Boston | USA
 
you have to be kidding. is this for real?
terence houk | Lay Person | chicago | USA
 
I was told about this idea, by who I would consider to be a very wise old Priest. Please consider all the options carefully.
Greg Ashe | Lay Minister | Salford | UK
 
Why does Rome hate the English language?
Cynthia Russett | Lay Person | Hartford | USA
 
I simply want to add my endorsement to the thousands of others I understand you have received to slow down (for my part, I'd rather eliminate) implementation of the Latinized translations in the liturgy the Vatican is trying to force upon English speakers. When I was a child (literally) we used those Latin texts as prescribed. When liberated from them after Vatican II, it appeared for a while that we were going to be treated as adults, but no, we now face the "reform of the reform" and are being treated as children again. The reformers of the reform, in my opinion, need some reforming themselves -- and that goes to the very top of the hierarchical ladder.
Robert J. Anzelmo | Lay Person | Washington, DC | USA
 
Dear Bishops around the Globe, Please take your time with this. with love, Jane
Jane Nitsch | Lay Minister | Baltimore | USA
 
What is the Church frightened of that it wants to revert to hiding God's love behind impregnable words?
LISA ANNE SINCLAIR | Lay Person | Sacred Heart, Wimbledon Village | UK
 
I'm 19 and I just began to understand the current translation. Personally I don't want to lose the translation. The wording makes sense to me and not to mention holds deep meaning in my heart. I really don't care if it is more "poetic" or not because to me the words are the most beautiful ever spoken. I will give the new translations a try if I must but if they don't meet my spiritual needs and I can understand them I know I'll just become a wondering Catholic who is in love with God with out a church to truly call home. Please make the English language in proper English there really is no excuse for it not to be.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Cincinnati | USA
 
Hello, As a grad student in Catholic Studies I think this is a mouthful. These sentences are too long. Leave well enough alone.
Anonymous | Lay Person | St. Paul-Minneapolis | USA
 
Are you aware of the amount of Roman Catholics you are ostracizing by the constant regression to former liturgy? I am a daily communicant and find myself having to work harder and harder to give the Church credibility. One of the few things that keeps me loyal is that my parish has a strong social justice ministry. I only wish that those who make the rules would remember that this is what the church is all about.
Susan Harrigan | Lay Person | San Diego | USA
 
The translations are atrocious! Whoever did this English is not their first language. I thought we wanted young people to be attracted to the Church. Such language and theology displayed by the language is pre-Vatican II - no more like Medieval!!
Eva J. Mesina | Religious | Honolulu | USA
 
I have been keeping up with the proposed changes and am appalled that anyone could be serious about publishing text that is so poorly written. When finances are so limited, why place this additional financial on parishes? Why did US bishops allow this to come to this point? Where is your voice, bishops? When so many needs of people are being overlooked, why expend time, energy, finances on this? Is this simply a way to avoid issues the leadership in the Church should be addressing? Thank you for considering my concerns.
Teresine Glaser | Religious | Dubuque | USA
 
As a next door neighbor of St. Ann's Roman Catholic Church in Ossining, and the most Anglo-Catholic of all the Episcopal Churches in the area, any change in the Roman Missal would set back movements toward the healing of the break between our churches. Too often, liturgical councils or committees take action without listening to the people. I urge you to listen to "What if We Just Said Wait."
The Rev. Canon Charles P. Pridemore | Priest | Ossining, NY (Episcopal) | USA
 
Archbishop Gillie Young was Archbishop of Hobart, Tasmania, and a key member of the Council. I remember he came to speak to us when I was a student at Cambridge University and said there were people in Rome just waiting to undo all the good work the Council had done, especially in the liturgy. I never thought such people would wait over forty years. This can not be the work of God. We must pray and pray and pray for the Church.
Peter Morgan | Priest | Liverpool | UK
 
I believe sensus fidelium should be consulted in a new translation of the Mass. In the words of Congar, 'the well-being of the Church and the nature of things’€¦ require that the laity should be able to make themselves heard by ecclesiastical authorities, or by way of information or advice, in everything that concerns them or wherein they may be able to make a useful contribution.' Surely a new translation of the Missal is one of these situations?
Amelia Galiunas | Lay Minister | Galveston-Houston | USA
 
It appears that the USCCB spent an inordinate amount of time fiddling with something that wasn't broken, while neglecting a host of other pastoral duties.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Santa Rosa | USA
 
There are problems with literal translations -- grammar and syntax may affect word order and sentence structure; there is difficulty in idiomatic language--what's clear in the original language may not translate well into another language; there might be archaic words like consubstantial, vouchsafe, hosts. In a study of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, there are several paragraphs that seem to address any attempt to make changes to current liturgical practices and language: #14 reminds us that the goal of liturgical reform is "that all the faithful be led to that full, conscious and active participation in liturgical celebrations ... ."; #34 urges that the rites "should be within the people's power of comprehension and normally should not require much explanation."' #36 addresses the preservation of Latin in the Latin rites, but also mentions the advantages to the people of the mother tongue. Finally, #21 states: "In this restoration, both texts and rites should be drawn up so that they express more clearly the holy things they signify. Christian people, as far as possible, should be able to understand them with ease and to take part in them fully, actively, and as befits a community."
Lillian H. Barbalas | Lay Person | Detroit | USA
 
The change of texts will once again silence an assembly that has struggled to find its voice in public worship, especially musically!
Joan Vos | Lay Minister | Los Angeles | USA
 
I have always considered the ICEL translation of 1973 a work of careful genius because it provided both dignity and simplicity. Those translators understood spoken English and wrote in complete and short sentences. The more samples of the New Roman Missal I read, the more I realize that those who worked on the new translation do not understand either oral or written English. Nor does it seem that they have any interest in making the Mass accessible. If this is a negotiated translation, the people's side lost.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Paterson | USA
 
Totally opposed to changes, I feel unnecessary and have caused me to lose focus during Holy Mass. I detest having to search through printed pamphlet in order to follower the mass, hence no focus
Roger Andre' | Lay Minister | Durban | South Africa
 
We have introduced some of the changes in South Africa but I find no enthusiasm for them.
Tony Thouard OFM | Priest | Johannesburg | South Africa
 
These translations return to language that splits the human person into physical and spiritual instead of recognizing the unity of the human being, body and spirit as one. It is also extremely POOR English! It does not reflect what we actually believe, nor does it reflect the way that we pray. It appears to be a way to force people back into a belief system and style of prayer instead of recognizing the fact that the Spirit works in each of us and encourages us to pray in words that are meaningful to us now - the new translations are NOT this!
Sr. Sara Sanders | Religious | Honolulu | USA
 
In this new version the English is at times cumbersome, sounds archaic and the mentality it encapsulated is academic, scholastic and unsuited to liturgical celebration for ordinary folk. Couldn't image Jesus using such a term as 'consubstantial.' He puts it so simply: "The Father and I are one." (Jn 10.30). We're his followers, so let's follow him.
Tom Cahill | Priest | Religious | Ireland
 
The original ICEL translations went through a vigorous approval process and were passed by all English-speaking Episcopal Conferences. To call this process into question is to falsify the whole liturgical reform process, personally directed by Pope Paul VI, as has been done in recent reports. The Congregation of Divine Worship was run at that time by liturgists whose knowledge has not been surpassed. Any liturgist who knows Latin and Greek would blanch at some of the offerings now on the table.
Anonymous | Priest | Liverpool | UK
 
I think that this new liturgy will have a far more negative effect that those who wrote it could ever possibly imagine.
Jocelyn Caramello | Lay Person | Middlesbrough | UK
 
I don't expect that we will be listened to, but at least we can say that we tried, that we didn't just sit back and accept what seems to be inevitable. I pray that I am proven wrong. Why do we seem to be taking so many backward steps??? Common sense should be the eighth gift of the Holy Spirit!
James Depiazzi | Lay Person | Bunbury | Australia
 
Although I have little hope that we will prevail, I sign in order to be with all those who cherish Vatican II and wish with all my heart that the vision of John XXIII will survive. However, realistically, I expect that the power-hungry Vatican Mafia will prevail. Who would have thought this would be unfolding in less that 50 years since those heady days!
Mary Frances O'C. Moriarty | Lay Minister | Arlington | USA
 
Please, please don't do this to us! How about having our finest writers come together and deliver us a text that is breathtakingly beautiful? I'm certain they could retain the essential message in vibrant and moving language, words that would stir us to follow Christ more deeply, words we would cherish and reflect upon.
Nori Kieran-Meredith | Priest | San Bernardino | USA
 
I am the Church also and I would like to be heard.
rita collins | Lay Minister | Rockville Centre | USA
 
I support this effort to be more pastorally sensitive to the people in the pews.
Rev. Lawrence McBrady | Priest | Chicago | USA
 
As the changes of Vatican II were gradually being introduced, I waited with anticipation for each new unfolding of a rich and meaningful liturgy. While I had been following the Latin Mass with my missal for most of my youth, to pray with words that touched my heart led me more deeply into the liturgy. I was in my early 20's then. The spirit of Vatican II has shaped and formed my theology, my understanding of church, community and ministry over many years. The new changes are strident and, I fear, offer prayers that I can no longer pray.
Valerie Hughes | Lay Minister | Washington, DC | USA
 
We could be like the Anglicans/Episcopalians and have services from the Roman Missal: 8:00AM - Liturgy of 1662 9:30 AM - Liturgy of 1929 11:00 AM - Liturgy of 1979 5:00 PM Saturday Vigil: Greek Spanish Liturgy in Latin!
Richard Hoenisch | Lay Minister | Sacramento | USA
 
Information and concern, about the translation, was sent me by a friend who is a religious and has taught all her life; she is particularly concerned about the effect the literal translation from the Latin will have for people with learning difficulties or who are not academically qualified. I have full confidence in her judgment and hence have signed this petition, even though I have not read the new Roman Missal myself.
Anonymous | Lay Person | Westminster | UK
 
This change is all so disheartening for me as I teach first grade Religious Ed to mostly refugee children. Just getting them to learn of the love of God is hard enough given their past and now they want to change the words to a more threatening tone! They just left a place where their lives were threatened on a daily basis. Please do not change the words.
Lisa Chicchelly | Lay Minister | Des Moines | USA
 
It's like looking in a rearview mirror. I'm going to keep my eye on the road ahead. I'd much rather continue the journey than to sit at home and recall how wonderful things used to be.
Ed Hoover | Priest | Toledo | USA
 
I am a teenager and I attend Mass weekly. I don’t think the translations need to be added. I cannot even understand the words.
Louisa Carenza Keenan | Lay Person | Green Bay | USA
 
I am very distressed over the new language proposal, and also over the backward drift from Vatican II decisions, philosophy and principles in general. If the hierarchy doesn’t stop this nit picking----there will soon be no church at all. In the face of scandal regarding sexual issue world wide, do they really think that such changes in liturgy against the will of the informed lay people is wisdom??
Laurene C. O'Brien | Lay Person | Albany NY | USA
 
Although a missionary in Burkina Faso, I am from the UK and I thoroughly agree with the sentiments expressed in the Statement of Concern and the desire to see more consultation of the People of God. I can not understand how one single English translation can be understood, and accepted by all English speakers across the world: from Ghana to South Africa, in the British Isles, through Asia to Australasia. All the different ways of speaking the language need to be accommodated. English is a living language and the People of God are very much alive.
Terence Madden | Priest | Ouagadougou | Burkina Faso
 
Fiat voluntas tua.
Thomas Patrick Hull | Lay Person | Chicago | USA
 
I heartily endorse this calm level of concern about the poor quality of translation into the English language. The original, longstanding English translation is much superior. This 'new' translation is an insult to those conversant with good English - This cannot be from the Holy Spirit of God!
Matt Gormley, religious priest | Priest | Port Elizabeth | South Africa
 
These new translations hurt my heart. Not only are they a huge step away from the simple, heartfelt words I grew up committing to my young soul, these new texts would make any English teacher worth their salt turn over in their grave!! Cumbersome, incoherent, self-righteous---just awful. In my wildest dreams I can't imagine what these bishops are thinking!! And as I read these texts, I see the extreme view I've always struggled with even more forcefully pronounced- that our time here on earth is only in anticipation of some heavenly prize. I could not disagree more. It didn't make sense to me as a young girl and it absolutely does not make sense to me now. I sign this petition for every little boy and girl sitting in the pews today. Life is about living TODAY, this moment-the future takes care of itself. I think Jesus said that.
Lynne Lafferty Baird | Lay Person | Steubenville | USA
 
Vatican II's vision must be sustained. I am a liturgy commission chair at my parish and lead cantor. We are very concerned about liturgical changes which water down or completely eliminate the direction Vatican II took the Church. Our church is the largest in the archdiocese and the second largest in Alabama. People come to Mass at our parish because of the changes, not despite them. We have a very active music ministry which attracts many people. We fear that these backward changes will destroy the progress which has been made. Our church traditionally brings more new Catholics into the Church at Easter than any other. Those responsible for these new policies should consider this before the new liturgy is promulgated.
Christopher Knight | Lay Minister | Mobile | USA
 
It is not a case of rejecting the new translation. It is just a case of testing it first and involving those who will be using it. Imposition will often cause dissension. If people are enabled to comment on what is being proposed knowing that their comments could result in change, it could work as a way of pulling people together even if not everyone agrees with the final result.
Cecilia Finnerty | Lay Person | Lancaster | UK
 
Every translator knows that there is meaning and nuances lost if you translate word for word from one language to the next. But in this overzealous concern for "purity" and closeness to the Latin translation of the mass, some of our leaders have become the very Sadducees and Pharisees that crucified our Lord Jesus - always worrying about the letter of the law rather than the spirit. Fidelity to a language is NOT fidelity to Christ.
Edgar Hernandez | Lay Minister | Jackson | USA
 
As a former professor of Latin and Modern Languages, I must state that some of these wordings and translations in question would have emptied my red ink fountain pen fairly quickly on my students' translation assignments for accuracy, grammar and style.
Heribert Breidenbach | Lay Person | Chicago | USA
 
As a Professor of English (Ph.D.) Harvard University, I dislike the proposed new translation for its literary and grammatical ineptitude and verbosity. Leave well enough alone!
Edward F. J. Tucker | Lay Person | Wheeling-Charleston | USA
 
I can't help but feel that this "new" translation is jetting me back to my childhood church experiences.
Catherine Ann Platt | Lay Person | Springfield in Illinois | USA
 
This is so disheartening. Holy Spirit send us another John XXIII.
Shirley Bohnert | Lay Person | Venice | USA
 
This is a time to bring people together.
Mary Tigue | Lay Person | Scranton | USA
 
I’m with you...and with your spirit!
van wagner | Priest | Tucson | USA
 
As the mother of two teenagers and an 11-year-old, I can say with certainty that these proposed changes will confuse and alienate children and teens. Are the people behind this proposed change trying to drive children, young people and middle-aged people away from the church? Parents have enough difficulty raising their children to attend Mass and pay attention. The proposed wording is convoluted, unclear and off-putting. The prayers we say now are clear and straight-forward. As a professional writer, I cannot understand why anyone would want to change what now is clear language to something so poorly translated as to make it undecipherable. ... Don't undo 45 years of prayers. Adopting the proposed new translations of the Roman Missal would be a grave mistake. I am a lifelong Catholic who has attended Mass weekly my entire life, even while in college. Even through all the sexual abuse scandals, the Mass was a comfort. These proposed changes will drive the faithful away.
Theresa Sullivan Barger | Lay Person | Hartford | USA
 
The new translation is very heavy handed. It appears to me to be an effort to cloak the beauty of The Word of God so that the meaning is obscure. It would appear to suggest that The Word of God should really only to be understood by some quaint philosophers who may deign to translate its meaning for ordinary folk if it occasionally occurs to them to do so. I thought the The Word of God was meant for everyone. Clearly the authors behind the new translation don't think so. The authors should be urged to re-examine this effort and the emphasis should be on letting the Light of God shine through, instead of trying to hide it.
Fintan J Power | Lay Person | Waterford & Lismore | Ireland
 
The impression given is that the Latin text of the mass is divinely inspired. I can find no evidence of this. Is this another step in the rowing back of the decisions of Vatican?
Micheal Braonin | Lay Person | Dublin | Ireland
 
While some may sincerely believe that these changes will better reflect the original language or intentions of these texts, I believe that this is not the time in the church to be messing with the language that people have come to know in their hearts. Changing statements like, "And also with you." to "And also with your spirit," or "Lord I am not worthy..." to "...that You should come under my roof," will only serve to alienate more people. The faithful are trying to be just that--the faithful, in the midst of deep betrayal and its attending sadness and anger. I think the people of God would be better served by addressing and coming to some new and healthy and inclusive policies with regard to the shortage of ordained ministers, as well as insuring that the "sins of the past" with regard to sexual abuses are not ever allowed to happen again. Please do not alienate even more people with these small and irritating changes. Thank you!
Christine Deily | Lay Minister | Milwaukee | USA
 
Thank you, thank you!! I m grateful for this initiative for I love the Church. I am afraid that the new translation will cause a divide in the Church, much like the Lefevrists - because the present translation has been the main form of my prayer life as a priest, and of thousands of other priests worldwide. I feel not at all comfortable with he new translation. It just does not sit right with me. Therefore, I would plead for a process that takes into account the reluctance of many to adopt the new translation. If the new translation causes a greater division and polarization within the Church, wouldn't it be wiser to hold on to what we have - for the perfect is the enemy of the good!
Guido Gockel M.H.M. | Priest | New York | USA
 
Pretty sad that I have to fear my church and worry that I may be dismissed form my ministry because of my opinion. If this works let's try it on some more critical issues! we all know what those are. However I'm afraid to voice them because that would be expressing my opinion and that is not permitted.
Anonymous | Religious | Cincinnati | USA
 
It is very special for me to go to a Mass in my native language, now that I live in Italy. Wherever I am I say the responses in my heart in English that I understand. The proposed changes fog that prayer with pompous words that get in the way of what I feel and want to express.
Katherine Mezzacappa | Lay Person | Massa-Carrara Pontremoli | Italy
 
Right on!
john Kiely | Lay Person | Santa Clara | USA

Click here to read hundreds more comments
 
 

What if we just said wait? |   EMAIL