ypsi~dixit

More changes from another story:

• The Act of Penitence, in which parishioners now confess aloud that they have sinned "through my own fault" would include the lines "through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault."

• In the Nicene Creed, the opening words "We believe" would become "I believe."

• Early in the Eucharistic Prayer, "Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might" would become "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God of hosts."

Y. wonders if this change is worth the candle.

Y. wonders if one thing about Catholicism that appeals to its believers is its familiarity. Many if not most parishioners were born post Vatican II. The current Mass is the same one they've repeated every week throughout their whole life. Changing it may seem to some to undermine something that by virtue of lifelong repetition may have come to seem immutable.

And I'm less than dazzled by the changes. In all, they are longer and less poetic than the current versions. Is it really worth making the Mass less beautiful in an era when the churches are steadily losing believers?

Some Catholic responses:

"George Harden, a religion scholar and a member of the board of directors of the Society of Catholic Social Scientists at Franciscan University, said oversimplification of the proposed ICEL text might sacrifice content.

“Sometimes profound thoughts and truths require long sentences and big words,” Harden said. “We don’t want to reduce the wording of the sacred Mass to the level of Time magazine. If people don’t understand it, you educate and prepare them.”

"Among the texts Bishop Trautman hopes to amend is the commission’s proposed rephrasing of “let your Spirit come upon these gifts to make them holy, so that they may become for us the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ,” in Eucharistic Prayer II. The commission wants the text to read: ‘therefore make holy these gifts, we pray, by the dew of your Spirit.”

“It’s a literal translation, and it doesn’t mean anything to Americans,” Bishop Trautman said. “The ‘dew’ of your Spirit — what does that mean?”

"Msgr. Harbert, a native of England, said that in Los Angeles he’ll defend the use of the word “dew.” He said he doesn’t understand why anyone wouldn’t like it.

“I think there is dew in America,” Msgr. Harbert said. “I saw some the other day.”

As a relatively recent ex-Catholic, I am going for this as a symptom of a general trend in the Church to make it more opaque, more mystical and less tied to social justice. They're fussing about dressing up Mary for Mayday and they're mostly silent on the war. A foreign policy built on evangelical hysteria and lies that results in mass deaths is worth at least commenting on, and they're worried about getting Americans to say the Rosary instead.

The Church has a long and distinguished history of social justice. That they might be drifting away from that heritage, as you say, is regrettable.

That is interesting about May Day and Mary. I did not know that. A bit of sniffing around shows that:

"In France, May Day had religious importance. The French considered the month of May sacred to the Virgin Mary. They enshrined young girls as May queens in their churches. The May queens led processions in honor of the Virgin Mary."

As far as opposition to the war, it's my understanding that the Vatican is quite properly against it:

"John Paul II sent his personal representative, Cardinal Pio Laghi, a friend of the Bush family, to remonstrate with the U.S. President before the war began. Pio Laghi said such a war would be illegal and unjust. The message was clear: God is not on your side if you invade Iraq."

The changes sound like the words of the mass as it was first said when it went from latin to english. When the changes are made, Catholics will complain, grumble and grip, and in the go along with it. For in the end, what is truely importain is the coming together as a community to celebrate as a family in the house of our father.

you forgot a "y" near the end, there, dear Listener.

Et cum spiritu tuo. Altho I am only forty-eight, I remember well the pre-VatII Latin and responses. All of these sound like direct translations from the Latin, which will feel very familiar to the enormous number of Catholics older than I.

Here's the hymn we used to sing as we hauled the Mary statue up & down the aisles and around the outside church, led by the nubile young May Queen: "O Mary we crown thee with blossoms today, Queen of the Angels, Queen of the May!" This is why we say, scratch a Catholic, find a Pagan...

What happens when you scratch a Pagan? :)

Quite an interesting point; for Catholics who remember the Latin responses, it will feel familiar. Very interesting.

I am fascinated to learn of the Mary-May custom--I'd been completely ignorant of that.

I'm not catholic, but most of these changes are exactly what we used to say in the Lutheran order of service that was used when I was a kid. For various reasons, literary and theological, I prefer the current versions, which are the same as we use in the Episcopal church.

The only thing I remember about VatII, was we no longer had daily mass before school with fasting and Latin. It meant that the nuns then quizzed us more closely on the Gospel (read in English rather than Latin) in addition to the sermon (which was always in Eng.). As for responses during mass, they have probably stolen whatever comfort and sense of continuity the mass held for me,
and also with you

Shupac: Call me ignorant: I had no idea the Lutheran church had an order of service resembling the Mass.

maryd: oops, I don't quite catch your point, sorry. Do you mean the new changes have stolen the comfort and sense of continuity from the mass in your opinion?

"Do you mean the new changes have stolen the comfort and sense of continuity from the mass in your opinion?"
Yes, the familiarity of the same responses is comforting. I must say I prefer a long hike or bike ride on Sunday mornings anyway.

Honestly, in all reality John Paul the Great highly influenced these changes. We are just returning to the roots that were lost in the hasty translation of Vatican II. These few minor changes will not bother the true believers of the church. In addition the line "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof." implies that we are not worthy to bring the true body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Savior into our earthly (sinful) bodies or in Cathlolic Thelogy Temple of the Holy Spirit. I praise our bishops for instituting the changes that were so close to the late Pope!